Tag

domestic sourcing

U.S. Domestic Locations for IT Services Delivery: Your Trump Card amidst H-1B Uncertainties | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

By | Blog, Onshoring, Talent

As part of President Donald Trump’s immigration reform efforts, the recently introduced legislation could make hiring H-1B visa holders significantly more expensive. The legislation calls for more than doubling the minimum salary of H-1B visa holders to $130,000.

The technology sector is the largest consumer of the visa. And about 70 percent of the 85,000 visas issued every year go to Indian workers employed by technology and outsourcing service providers to provide IT services to leading American enterprises.

Such a massive hike in the proposed minimum salary for H-1B visa holders is forcing enterprises and service providers alike to rethink their talent strategy from offshore to onshore. Factors such as adoption of agile methodology and regulatory requirements are also driving up the demand for onsite resources, and those will likely need to be sourced locally from within the U.S. as the landed resource model become challenged.

This increased focus on onshore resources has both enterprises and service providers alike considering the merits of potential U.S. locations. The landscape of IT services delivery from within the U.S. is complex, with more than 150 leverageable locations. The help simplify the view, Everest Group has classified delivery locations in the country into various tiers based on socio-economic status, maturity of IT services delivery, talent availability, and operating costs.

US Domestic Sourcing for IT Services

Deciding on the best location for U.S.-based IT services delivery must be based on a business case that considers multiple factors, and perhaps some trade-offs. For example, Tier-2 locations offer the twin advantage of moderate operating cost and breadth and depth of skills, but you might have difficulty attracting resources with extremely specialized skills to move from a Tier-1 city such as San Francisco to Dallas or Atlanta. And although Tier-3 and 4 locations are suitable for low-cost transactional IT services delivery, they may not be appropriate options if you need, or anticipate needing, more advanced skills.

US Domestic Sourcing for IT Services 2

While the proposed legislation hasn’t yet become law, turbulence and disruption of this potential magnitude demands significant research and pre-planning. As Benjamin Franklin, one of the founding fathers of the United States said, “By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail.”
For more information on this topic, please read the following Everest Group reports.

Think Oak Ridge, Tennessee Isn’t on Your List of Likely Domestic Service Delivery Sites? Think Again | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

By | Blog, Onshoring

Eric Simonson’s recent blog, “John Mellencamp Named Honorary Everest Group Analyst of the Month,” highlighted the dominance of tier-3 locations in the United Sates for onshore service delivery. Now it’s time to take a look at the tier-5 and rural locations in the U.S., per the North America Domestic Outsourcing location landscape study we recently conducted for RevAmerica, an event focused solely on domestic ITO and BPO sourcing.

Given that places such as Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Albany, Georgia, and Jacksonville, Texas have populations below 100,000, with limited presence of colleges and poor connectivity to commercial airports, one would not expect them to contribute significantly to onshore service delivery. However, our analysis of tier-5 and rural locations revealed five interesting facts.

Tier-5 and rural locations are growing and have a sizeable share in the domestic sourcing market

Tier-5 and rural locations account for approximately 20 percent of the total service providers’ delivery centers, and 16 percent of the delivery FTEs in the United States. The Midwest region has the highest share of these delivery centers.

Distribution of domestic FTEs and US delivery centers by city-tiers

While onshoring in general has been on the rise, the leverage of tier-5 and rural locations has witnessed significant momentum. In the last decade, the number of new delivery center set ups in these locations has increased by ~150 percent, from an average of three centers per year in 2005-2006 to seven centers in 2013-2014.

Number of new center setups per year in tier-5 and rural locations in US

At the same time, the share of tier-5 and rural locations in new U.S. delivery center set ups has gone up from ~19 percent in 2005-2006 to 25 percent in 2013-2014.

There are 100+ tier-5 and rural cities to choose from

More than a hundred tier-5 and rural locations are currently being leveraged by service providers for onshore service delivery. There are also a number of other potentially viable locales. Given the wide range of options these locations provide, they become an important consideration for players looking to establish a wider U.S. presence.

A large number of contact centers call these locations home

Distribution of delivery centers by function in tier-5 and rural cities

~61 percent of the existing centers in these locations deliver contact center services, as compared to 22 percent for IT services, and 17 percent for business process services. Leading multinational players such as Alorica, Convergys, Sitel, Sykes, Teleperformance, and Teletech leverage these locations for contact center service delivery.

These locations play a meaningful role in the location portfolio for domestic pure-plays

Number of delivery centers by provider

The leverage of tier-5 and rural locations is highest for domestic pure-plays – e.g., CrossUSA, Eagle Creek Software Services, Onshore Outsourcing, and Rural Sourcing Inc. – which have ~37 percent of their delivery centers in these locations. On an overall basis, traditional MNC’s still dominate the market landscape as they have significantly large number of delivery centers in the United States as compared to other players.

The talent pool is sizeable enough to support 1-2 moderate sized delivery centers per location

While talent availability in tier-5 and rural locations is generally lower than in tiers 1 to 4, they still offer a pool capable to support one or two moderate sized delivery centers. The typical delivery center size in these places is ~340 FTEs, as compared to a national average of ~445 FTEs.  However, there is evidence of players achieving a scale of above 500 FTEs, especially for contact center services, where high school graduates are utilized.

Average number of FTEs per delivery center

As onshoring grows in the United States, leverage of tier-5 and rural locations will also grow. Service providers are establishing their presence in these locales due to their lower costs and lesser competitive intensity. Hence, there is a significant opportunity for economic development agencies in these locations to attract potential investors and create employment opportunities.

To download a full copy of our research on domestic delivery, please visit: https://research.everestgrp.com/Product/EGR-2015-2-R-1455/North-America-Domestic-Outsourcing-Services-Providers-Embrace-

For more Market Insights™ on this topic, please visit:

https://www.everestgrp.com/tag/domestic-sourcing

To download our presentation from the RevAmerica event, please visit: http://www.revamerica.com/program/


Photo credit: Wikipedia

Onshoring, Talent Development, Automation – My Top 10 Picks from RevAmerica 2015 | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

By | Blog, Onshoring, Talent

Last month I had the opportunity to attend and co-present with Eric Simonson at a special event in the outsourcing sector, RevAmerica 2015, held in New Orleans, LA. You can download our keynote presentation here. For those who might not know, RevAmerica is a domestic outsourcing event in its second year. The event focused on a multitude of topics and was attended by a strong community of service providers, buyers, economic development agencies, analysts/consulting firms, and academic institutions. Here are my top 10 takeaways from the event:

  1. Buyers are looking at their IT and BP service delivery portfolio more holistically than ever and asking the shoring question more seriously. They are willing to evaluate onshoring as an alternate and in some cases willing to even bend their rules around cost savings to get the extra flexibility in delivery.

  2. Service providers have a major role to play in onshoring growth as they can not only harness the available talent pool, but also create a delivery model that makes economic sense.

  3. Domestic pure-play service providers are diligently making the business case for onshoring. The ones that do this without demeaning the offshoring benefits are likely to be more successful in not only winning pursuits, but also in sharpening their own value proposition for buyers. In this regard, I liked Genesis10, Nexient, and Rural Sourcing’s approach that are playing on the strengths of onshoring rather than making unnecessary comparisons with offshoring.

  4. Economic development agencies (EDAs) are evolving in their thinking and go-to-market approach. Those who are serious about this sector, such as North Dakota Dept. of Commerce and Louisiana Economic Development (LED), have a more collaborative approach towards working with providers/enterprises. However, there is a lack of collaboration among economic development agencies for the common goal.

  5. Talent development continues to be an area of immense interest. Partnership with universities, training/re-skilling programs to create talent in places where people have limited opportunities, and hiring veterans and their spouses are all examples of initiatives to strategically develop the available talent for domestic sourcing. A great example of this is the partnership between IBM, LED, and LSU College of Engineering where State of Louisiana will invest in the institution to expand higher education programs in order to increase the annual computer science graduate output to support IBM’s delivery center in Baton Rouge.

  6. Tier-3 cities are the epicenter of activity in the domestic sourcing space, with maximum centers and headcount located in this cities. They are also the ones that will see maximum growth in the future, but we should watch for saturation trends.

  7. The buzz around robotic process automation (RPA) is getting stronger, especially in the context of domestic sourcing as onshore providers can compete with the offshore labor arbitrage model by harnessing the potential of RPA (where applicable).

  8. The role of educational institutions has to increase to make onshoring a compelling alternative in the eyes of both providers and buyers. EDAs can only promise sustainable talent pool, but not deliver it unless educational institutions show the flexibility and support at a sustained, tactical level – implying changing curriculum, adding industry interaction programs, etc. while still serving the overall mission.

  9. Agile methodology and its implications for working models for IT teams are a great blessing for the onshore model. However, agile can only be one of the selling points. Domain expertise, ability to ramp up/ramp down, technology expertise, and cost of delivery are all factors for evaluating a provider’s capabilities in the onshore context.

  10. The notion of “domestic sourcing = impact sourcing” is flawed. Beyond generating jobs for the underprivileged, domestic sourcing’s larger mandate is to create jobs for the unemployed educated people of the country. There are some domestic sourcing plays such as Onshore Outsourcing and Liberty Source that are doing impact sourcing in an onshore model.

Overall the event touched upon some very relevant topics from the domestic outsourcing perspective and is paving the way for developing a stronger ecosystem to support this sector. Kudos to the Ahilia team for organizing a great event! Last but not the least, in case you are interested in learning more about the domestic outsourcing landscape, you can download Everest Group’s full report here. You may also want to read Eric’s blog on tier-3 cities: John Mellencamp Named Honorary Everest Group Analyst of the Month.


Photo credit: Omni Royal Orleans

John Mellencamp Named Honorary Everest Group Analyst of the Month | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

By | Blog

“Well I was born in a small town
And I live in a small town
Prob’ly die in a small town
Oh, those small communities

All my friends are so small town
My parents live in the same small town
My job is so small town
Provides little opportunity

— John Mellencamp, Small Town (1985)

Turns out Mr. Mellencamp was a pretty good analyst when it comes to assessing global services employment opportunities in small communities. So much so, that I am officially naming him as “Honorary Everest Group Analyst of the Month.”

No, I am not smoking something.

We just completed a first of its kind analysis of the U.S. Domestic Outsourcing location landscape for RevAmerica and finally have the key facts the industry has been lacking. In short, although smaller communities are sometimes used for service delivery, the reality is that the vast majority of the market is concentrated in larger communities with populations measured in the 100,000s vs. 10,000s. In particular, tier-3 cities are the sweet spot…the largest number of centers, the largest employment, and the largest centers.

Defining the city tiers

In order to analyze approximately 250 metro cities, we segmented them into six groups – tier-1 through tier-5 plus rural. As indicated below, the city segments are characterized by differences in population size plus commercial and educational factors.

Location Definitions

Although only one dimension of a city’s potential for service delivery, it is easy and revealing to look at the differences in average population size of the city tiers. Each city tier is 20-40% of the population of the next larger city tier, which leads to a dramatic difference in the profile of cities that are 2-3 tiers different from each other.

Population of city tiers

It’s good to be a tier-3 city!

One of the most interesting findings from the research was the extent to which tier-3 cities dominate on almost every dimension. As shown in the exhibit below, they have the largest share of FTEs and delivery centers of all cities. Further, their centers are on average larger than any other city tier.

Distribution of FTEs and US delivery centers by city-tiers

Additionally, tier-3 cities have the largest portion of multi-function centers (some combination of IT, business process, and contact center) and are the centers which are expected to grow the most in coming years.

Given that tier-3 cities average one million in population, most are surprised that cities of this size are driving the growth of domestic outsourcing delivery – many would expect smaller cities to be the primary forces. So why are tier-3 cities favored?

In short, we believe this is due to three factors which work in combination with each other:

  • Sufficient cost savings: Relative to tier-1 cities, tier-3 cities offer 15-20% savings; moving to tier-4 cities may only offer 5% more savings and in many cases is either cost neutral or even higher cost than a tier-3 city.
  • Enough talent: With nearly one million in population, the installed base of experienced talent is sizeable. Further, most tier-3 cities have large colleges which produce fresh talent for the entry labor force. Combined with the life style benefits of a larger city (airport, entertainment, shopping, etc.), tier-3 cities have the ability to both keep talent and to attract talent from other cities – either smaller or larger cities. Not everyone would want to live in New York, NY; similarly, many people could not imagine living in a town of Midland, MI (a town of roughly 50,000). However, many people could be comfortable in a city of one million.
  • Accessible: Although the idea of a remote, small city may seem attractive in order to capture an isolated labor pool, this doesn’t hold up well when assessed in detail. First, even small communities have competition for talent plus limited talent pools – costs can quickly spiral up. Second, the practical logistics of transit to these small cities creates an inconvenience that most organizations wish to avoid (especially for IT service delivery, requiring more cross-center collaboration). Most tier-3 cities are connected by direct flights to other major business centers within two to three hours of flight time.

In other words, tier-3 cities have an attractive mix of cost savings and talent, while still being comparatively easy from an operational perspective. This is broadly true, but less true for pure contact center work which can more easily operate at scale in tier-4 cities and even some tier-5 cities due to the broad labor pool which can fill contact center roles.

So, would Mr. Mellencamp’s small town have been a viable service delivery location? He is from Seymour, Indiana, with a population of about 16,000 – clearly a rural community by our definition. Highly unlikely many organizations could operate an IT or business process center of 200 FTEs in Seymour, although a smaller contact center could be viable. So, yes, there might be jobs…but little opportunity…

Also check out my co-presenter Sakshi Garg’s top 10 takeways from RevAmerica.


Photo credit: Flickr