Tag: service providers

EPAM Defies the Odds in Global Services Market | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

EPAM, a midsize, $800+ million service provider, is growing faster than the market. And it’s achieving this notable status in a mature application space where others have struggled and also in a services world that favors scale and size. What is its secret for beating the odds and seemingly defying gravity?

At first glance, EPAM shouldn’t be able to succeed. Its customer base is large enterprises with mature sourcing models. And although it has an arbitrage value proposition, it uses Eastern European resources, which are more expensive arbitrage than available in India. Yet it achieves attractive margins and is quickly growing.

EPAM succeeds because it has a highly differentiated value proposition around its talent model, client intimacy and capabilities. It’s a compelling story.

It delivers against the traditional pyramid offshore factory model with its incumbent churn. EPAM provides, instead, talent from Eastern Europe who have deep engineering skills and are more technically savvy. Once it puts a team in place, it keeps that team in place; so there is low turnover in staff. This positions EPAM as better understanding its clients and bringing a more stable, higher-productive, knowledgeable team than its competitors, with deep customer and technical knowledge. They don’t take over all the operations; they focus on highly technical applications that tend to be mission critical.

EPAM succeeds because it hits the market with the right differentiated story and a set of capabilities, messaging and business practices that align well for large, mature companies. In today’s mature market, EPAM presents a nice counterpoint to the big Indian firms. And they are taking share.

Monkey Poop & the INR 500 Shoe Shine: Lessons in Value for Outsourcing? | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

“Sir, sir – a monkey pooped on your shoe!” was the first thing that brought my attention to the large, wet mound on my casual walking shoe.

Not a convenient development when walking around Connaught Place in New Delhi.

Interestingly, the next thing I heard was “Shoe shine – only 500.”

Despite the jet lag, I was able to immediately recognize the scam. The fact that the same person who pointed out the poop before I noticed it also happened to have a shoe shine kit was a pretty good clue. Never did see the accused monkey, although I strongly suspect it was actually the person who I begrudgingly paid INR 500 for that shoe clean-up and shine!

I filed it away as a humorous lesson and forgot about it until mentioning it some colleagues in our India office the next week. They were aghast and surprised that I would pay so much for the shoe service (about US$10 at the time, and 20% of the value of the shoes – which I had never previously considered deserving of a shine). From their perspective, I had paid far above market value (10-15 times the market rate) and should have negotiated the price down. From my perspective, I had no idea of the market price and just wanted the issue fixed quickly despite knowing the painful truth that the source of the problem was also the solution to the problem.

I was recently reflecting on this for reasons completely unknown to me (er, might have come about while changing a baby diaper…you get the idea). I was struck by the fact that my colleagues, the shoe shiner, and I all had different thoughts upon the value exchange. In an effort to demonstrate exactly how much I over-analyze life, I distilled this to three lessons.

1. Value is relative

The shoe shine from my perspective cost US$10 and allowed me to get back to enjoying the sights and sounds of Delhi. Frustrating, but well worth the money from a functional perspective that had nothing to do with the shoes themselves, but rather to remove a nuisance and enable me to do other things. From my colleagues’ perspective, it was 10x the market rate. From my experience, it was about 2X the market rate (US$5) in the U.S., so I did not mind the rate too much. If I had been asked to pay 10X the U.S. rate or US$50, I would have resisted and likely gone ballistic. For the shoe shiner, ignoring raw material costs of the poop, it was tremendous profit and a highly valuable exchange.

Depending upon one’s perspective, the financial price of a value exchange and the utility from the value are viewed differently.

No wonder we struggle to put a price to value in outsourcing!

2. Attribution of value creation is contextual

Although the shoe shiner definitely helped solve the issue and did so quickly, I could not be pleased with the value received; the context of the need for the services completely undermined his shoe shining contribution.

If this had not been a scam and I accidentally stepped into something and a shoe shiner happened to be nearby and solved the issue, then I would have thanked him profusely and happily paid the INR 500. However, instead of thanking him, I left grumbling and scowling because of the context in how the value was created for me.

In other words, if you cause the problem, your perceived value in solving the problem is less than if you solve problems created by others.

3. Perception of value is as much about experience as results

After starting to reflect on this, I pulled out these old shoes (see photo), which I have not worn much in recent years. Ironically, they look pretty good. In fact, I believe the leather is softer and better looking than when I first bought them. They have also avoided collecting as much dust as before the unplanned shoe shine.

In other words, they benefited from the shoe shine and it appears to have been a decent shoe shine.

But I can’t give the shoe shiner any credit for this because the experience was such a turn-off.

So, solve the problem, but also ensure the experience of problem resolution is appreciated by the recipient.

Outsourcing is fundamentally a service provided by one complex organization to another complex organization. The situation is ripe with many factors (mis-communications, mis-aligned stakeholders, budget pressures, turnover, etc.) to limit the chance for perceived value exchange between organizations. Although we need to ensure the work completed creates value, we should not forgot that how we treat each other and manage our interactions can completely undermine the appreciation of value. If you solve a problem, don’t expect credit if you created the problem – solve problems beyond your scope. If you solve a problem, don’t expect much credit if the experience is suboptimal – own the problem and the service experience.

Perspective on Wipro’s Cost Reduction | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

Wipro is reportedly looking at headcount and cost-reduction exercise in the realm of $300+ million. Why are they doing this? Is it a good idea? Of a few possible interpretations for wringing out costs, here’s my opinion – starting with my belief that this undertaking was inevitable. The more important question is how will they do it?

Wipro’s action comes on the back of similar news about TCS and IBM and is predicated by the pricing pressures hitting leading service providers. As I blogged recently, pricing pressure has become acute with existing clients looking for significant cost reductions.

In addition, the market is changing and clients are more insistent about requiring onshore resources; this raises operational costs for the Indian firms, which need to invest in a richer set of capabilities on shore. These resources located close to the customer are substantially more expensive for Wipro and other providers than their India-based resources.

It’s a case of when push comes to shove; if Wipro and other providers are to maintain reasonable margins or be competitive, something has to give. That “something” is the necessity to take out costs to allow them to meet the pricing pressures and allow them to hire the onshore resources that clients increasingly insist upon.

How will they achieve the cost reduction? 

I think Wipro and others will move further into the industrialized factory model, which relies on an ever-widening pyramid that pushes work down to lower-cost resources and eliminates middle-management roles.

However, I think the strategy of moving deeper into the pyramid model raises the risk of further commoditizing the space and increasing churn. And clients are more and more intolerant of churn. The likely result is that it will open the door for firms like EPAM and others that differentiate around persistent teams of experienced engineers.

Is the Services Industry in Decline? | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

Information Services Group (ISG) publishes a quarterly “ISG Outsourcing Index,” which is widely read in the services industry. Q1 2015 wasn’t a pretty picture. The Americas saw a modest 10 percent gain in ACV, and India/South Asia showed strong. But the rest of the world took a bullet, so to speak; EMEA’s ACV declined by 25 percent, Asia Pacific by 45 percent, and Australia/New Zealand had one of the weakest quarters in a decade. So the modest gains are dramatically offset by large losses elsewhere. This is further evidence of what I’ve been blogging about for some time – the industry is at an inflection point and preparing to shift. Let’s look at where the shift is headed.

But, first, a word of caution. We at Everest Group stopped publishing our index based on publicly announced deals many years ago because we found the data was inherently flawed. If all you use is publicly announced deals, you’re only looking at the large transactions and only some of those because many deals are not published. The next-generation deals and smaller deals are typically not announced. So the data is inherently noisy. Having said that, there is some value to looking at what’s happening in publicly announced deals. As such, the ISG Outsourcing Index is as good as any.

Four themes in today’s market 

The services industry is now in a mature state. As such, it has four major characteristics or themes in what’s happening:

  1. Affected by economic cycles
  2. Brownfield deals
  3. Pricing pressures
  4. Shift toward smaller transactions

Cyclical impact. As a mature industry, the services business is affected by the cyclical economy to a much larger degree than it has been in the last 15 years. To wit, where we have a growing economy in North America, the industry has share increases; where there are struggling economies in the rest of the world, the industry has share and ACV decreases.

Brownfield deals. The services world now is largely defined as brownfield deals in that the majority of activity is recompeting existing scope rather than capturing new scope. In this world, awards are smaller transactions for shorter durations.

Pricing pressures. In a recent blog post, I detailed the pricing pressures now hitting service providers and resulting in a major downward spiral and pricing wars. The ISG data also reported the downward-pricing situation. Brownfield deals also exacerbate this situation as they’re hinged on winning recompetes with existing customers, which are intent on driving prices down.

Shift toward smaller transactions. In addition to the brownfield impact there is an uneasiness in the market due to customers’ desire to break up current deals and shift to next-generation models that are automation based, as-a-service or digital. We see this movement clearly as we look at the unannounced deals that we track at Everest Group. Our observation is that these unannounced deals are taking share but with small ACV awards.

This phenomenon is particularly prevalent in the infrastructure martketplace, where there has been a secular shift from large, bundled, asset-heavy transactions to asset-light, unbundled transactions with shorter duration. The emerging markets of cloud computing and as-a-service accelerate this movement. Finally, we see tangible evidence of enterprises preparing to make large-scale shifts to cloud by adopting shorter, more flexible transaction structures for their legacy infrastructure and applications.

Bottom line

The industry faces the prospect of a maturing market impacted by economic cycles, pricing pressures, brownfield focus, and customers shifting to new models. The good news is that the new models and technologies are growth areas for the industry. However, these deals are smaller and are not usually announced deals and therefore don’t show up in the ISG Index.

Capgemini Acquires IGATE to Power North American Ambitions | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

Today, Capgemini announced the merger agreement to acquire IGATE for $4.04 billion. IGATE is a US-listed technology and services company headquartered in New Jersey with US$1.27 billion in revenue in 2014. The sale of IGATE has been in the offing for a while after private equity company, Apax Partners, which financed most of IGATE’s US$1.2 billion acquisition of Patni Computer Systems in 2011, converted its debt into equity in November 2014 (becoming its largest shareholder) and also filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to have the option to sell its stake. The combined group will have nearly US$13 billion in annual revenue and 177,000 people globally. Capgemini aims to realize revenue synergies of US$100-150 million (through cross-selling and account farming) and cost savings of US$75-105 million over the next three years. The deal’s size and cross-ranging implications make it one of the most significant transactions in the IT-BPO industry. Capgemini is paying a premium for its North American ambitions, over 3x revenue multiple. It outstrips other such deals in the marketplace, notable CGI-Logica (2012) and IGATE-Patni (2011), indicative of the scale and urgent imperative driving deal rationale.

Major acquisitions in the IT-BPO market (US$ million)

Major acquisitions in the IT-BPO market

What works?

Prima facie it gives Capgemini a sizable foothold in the North American market, the biggest IT outsourcing market in the world. North America becomes a significant market for the combined entity, comprising nearly one-third of 2015 projected revenue, up from 20% for Capgemini earlier. Europe will still account for over half of the combined revenue. The North American region contributed nearly 80% to IGATE’s revenue in 2014, with marque clients such as GE and Royal Bank of Canada. This had increasingly become important for the company since its French-rival Atos bought Xerox’s North American ITO business late last year. That deal also made Atos the primary IT services provider to Xerox (~US$240 million annual revenue) and also have the right to first refusal on collaborative opportunities with Xerox.

It enhances Capgemini’s delivery presence in offshore/low-cost regions specifically India, where most of IGATE’s 33,000-strong workforce is based. Capgemini had earlier acquired Kanbay in 2006 with a focus on increasing India operations. It also bought Unilever’s India GIC – Unilever India Shared Services Ltd (UISSL) – in parts over 2006-2010. Around two-fifths of Capgemini’s global workforce of 144,000 employees is based in India, with the combined group having an offshore leverage of nearly 55% by the end of 2015, comprising over 90,000 people.

The move adds greater definition to the verticalization maneuvers Capgemini had been driving of late. IGATE’s strong BFSI client roster (CNA, Royal Bank of Canada, MetLife, UBS, Morgan Stanley), comprised over two-fifths of its revenue last year. Similar synergies are expected in manufacturing, healthcare, and retail sectors.

Capgemini’s functional spread stands to gain on account of IGATE’s mixture of IT and BPO services. Specifically, Capgemini has been looking to grow its ADM and BPO business, as enterprise clients exhibit a preference for integrated services stacks led by an expanding As-A-Service economy, combine infrastructure, application, and business process service needs. This is the driving force behind IGATE’s business model – ITOPS or Integrated Technology and Operations, which will help Capgemini position itself as a fully integrated service provider. The deal also holds Capgemini in good stead, bolstering its industrialization play. As the value proposition in the global services space moves beyond labor arbitrage, service providers are looking at non-linear IP-driven revenue sources through products, platforms, and solutions. IGATE has monetized the ITOPS value proposition through productized applications and platforms – IDMS (for BFS), IBAS (for TPA clients), and SIB (for retail customers) – which are distinct P&L-plays for the company. Capgemini is also likely to receive additional tax benefits from the deal, as it is carrying a large deferred tax asset in the U.S.

The uncertain

The adage “culture eats strategy for breakfast” couldn’t be truer for this merger. There is a stark cultural tension with a Europe-heritage firm struggling with offshoring trying to integrate an Indian IT service provider with a strong North American client roster. Plus all is not rosy with IGATE. One of its largest clients, Royal Bank of Canada, has been facing problems for its use of IGATE services while GE’s contribution to revenue has been falling. CEO Ashok Vemuri’s hire-for-growth plan witnessed a bump when Q4 2014 headcount actually fell by about 900 employees. IGATE registered an annual revenue growth of just 10% to $1.27 billion in 2014, lagging other IT peers. On the executive front, the merger means uncertainty for Ashok Vemuri, who left Infosys specifically to take over as CEO after Phaneesh Murthy left. His dream of staying a CEO might be curtailed, and he will be tempted to move on, as he wouldn’t want to occupy a role similar to what he held at Infosys, with even less leverage with the leadership. This potential void in leadership could pose a major hurdle for the integration process.

The road ahead

The move is indeed a bold one by Capgemini to catalyze growth, plug delivery/regional/vertical gaps, and streamline operations. IGATE is the right size for Capgemini to absorb – not too small so it does not have a tangible impact but not so big that to create an integration struggle. The sizable deal size could spur U.S. giants to action. Given Capgemini’s European legacy, other regional service providers could mull their options in a bid to expand their operational footprint. We have already seen recent activity in Europe with the Steria-Sopra merger last year. MNCs struggling for growth and looking at globalizing delivery could start thinking of mid-sized players as possible targets. Some of these players have growth issues, significant PE investments, scaling problems – all of which make a good rationale for a merger with a bigger player. On the other hand, the deal lacks some specific attributes when it comes to next-generation technology tenets such as cognitive computing, automation, digital, and analytics. Moreover, Capgemini will need to bridge the inherent disconnect between two different cultures, systems, processes, and people, to make this integration successful. The deal is certain to spark further consolidation and conversations, as service providers witness pricing pressures, evolving engagement models, and increasing anti-incumbency, in a bid to adapt to the As-A-Service construct.


Photo credit: Capgemini

Price Takes a Beating in the Services World | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

What I’ve predicted for several years is now happening and the global services industry is experiencing a pricing war. The industry’s core arbitrage marketplace is moving from modest pricing competition to an intense pricing war. Providers’ prices are coming down not by 3 to 5 percent but in some cases by 20 to 30 percent. I’ve blogged about this inevitability for some time, and the last six months showed rapid movement in a downward spiral. Pricing disciplines that providers previously exercised are collapsing. Why has pricing become so precipitous?

Who is driving the intense pricing competition?

Mature enterprise clients, which are on their second or third generation of sourcing, are instigating this market move. They themselves face unrelenting cost pressures and point to providers’ high margins as proof that there are plenty of gains to be had. At the same time as they eye the margins, they are convinced that the next generation of cloud, automation, and as-a-service offers provide breakthrough cost advantages; and they seek to combine all this into step-change gains.

With these raised expectations also comes a willingness to switch providers and a realization that the barriers to switching have been greatly reduced. This is evident in our statistics, and I blogged last year about the increasing anti-incumbent bias.

Factors exacerbating the downward spiral

In addition to enterprises’ effort to drive pricing down, other market forces add to the momentum toward a pricing war. As enterprises’ willingness to switch providers increases, incumbent service providers are increasingly in an untenable situation. Investors reward firms that demonstrate growth; so providers can’t afford to have lower-priced competitors capture large chunks of their existing revenue. In addition, the maturing arbitrage market no longer gains share from traditional models at the same rate.

As the prospect of losing existing customers becomes increasingly painful, a retain-at-all-cost dynamic is increasingly the tone forcing account teams to drop price for existing customers while encouraging providers to use lower prices as the way to win new customers.

All these actions create a downward spiral that feeds the enterprise customers’ belief that pricing must come down. And voila! We have gathering momentum on a pricing war.

Industry implications

I think the implications for the industry are very significant. The days of relying on contractual switching costs to protect providers are over. Switching costs have eroded and providers are left with no choice.

I think the new normal will be much more competitive pricing – certainly for mature clients, but also it will spread to new clients. Clearly the idea of getting COLA adjustments is an uphill climb.

I’m not saying there is a race to the bottom in all market segments. Certainly providers in the growth areas such as as-a-service models and digital technologies and value-added areas will be able to command high margins. The challenge for the industry is that the core of business is in the quickly commoditizing spaces with a customer base that is unwilling to pay a premium. We must accept that this is happening.

It brings to my mind words in a Dylan Thomas poem: “Rage, rage against the dying of the light.”


Photo credit: Flickr

Services Industry on the Cusp of a Changing Provider Landscape | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

I’ve blogged before about consolidation in the services industry, and I believe the industry is now on the cusp of a new round of significant acquisitions. But don’t expect a repeat of the usual M&A strategy. We’ll see a shift from the usual tuck-in acquisition strategy to billion-dollar-capability acquisitions. At this game-changing level, consolidation could have an immense impact on the industry.

Market conditions are ripe for consolidation: a maturing marketplace, the cost of capital is very low and there is a changing perspective in executive ranks toward major acquisitions. As a result, the number of highly acquisitive players has jumped dramatically.

Cognizant led the way with its TriZetto acquisition, which changed the game in terms of size. ATOS acquired the infrastructure arm of Xerox. At Everest Group we also see Capgemini, Fujitsu, Genpact, NTT Data and Wipro as highly acquisitive players. And we wouldn’t be surprised to find others driving consolidation.

It will be interesting to see who these companies acquire – and whether they will acquire each other.


Photo credit: Flickr

Service Providers are Killing the Goose That Lays Golden Eggs | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

I blogged last year about the growing anti-incumbent bias in the services industry. That’s not to say that clients are biased against incumbent providers, but there are more clients who want to switch out providers than there used to be. This is true across every segment of global services (applications, infrastructure and BPO). We can trace at least some of this client mindset back to providers’ actions that are similar to the farmer in Aesop’s Fable who killed his goose that laid golden eggs. In their haste to get more golden eggs (more profitability), providers unintentionally kill the golden substance inside their goose (existing client base).

At the heart of the issue is providers’ wrong view of their clients. As a result, they take actions that cause clients to believe the provider exploits them, as the actions benefit the provider’s revenue. When a client believes the provider is only interested in maximizing its revenue, the client no longer sees the provider as a trusted advisor.

Here are three examples I’ve observed in which providers appear to act for their own interests, which results in clients no longer trusting them.

  1. The provider moves from an FTE-based model to a transaction-based model, but the provider’s revenue stays the same. Basically the provider finds a way to charge the client more for volume, which wouldn’t need to happen under the FTE-based model. Clients see through that, and the provider loses its trusted position. Clients realize the provider is exploiting them rather than serving them.
  1. The provider moves to a productivity model, promising to support portfolio apps at lower cost through a managed service. What actually transpires? The provider nickel-and-dimes the client, which ends up paying more money over time. Functions that were delivered in the FTE model are now a la carte, outside of the new model; so the client actually pays twice for the service.
  1. The provider flattens out its factory model and optimizes it to use junior resources instead of senior resources. The net result for the client is churn in the provider’s resources, so the provider doesn’t build client or industry knowledge. On top of the churn, the client actually ends up with lower productivity because junior people now do what senior people were doing.

And that’s how providers kill the goose that laid golden eggs.


Photo credit: Flickr

Why Everest Group Changed its Point of View on Infosys | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

Since publishing our two most recent blogs about the business situation at Infosys (Connecting All the Dots and Silicon Valley company) and comparing those perspectives to our blogs over the past two years, people have asked us: “Why did you change your point of view about Infosys?” Here’s why – it’s because most of what we predicted about Infosys came true.

We have a relentlessly objective point of view, and our blogs over the past couple of years pointed out the internal problems we observed at Infosys. We called the firm out early on its arrogance and hubris in the marketplace, evidenced in its commitment to premium pricing despite the unsustainability of its pricing vis a vis the marketplace, along with its inward-looking focus instead of focusing on customer intimacy.

Because of these actions, in the midst of the maturing AO market and changing customer expectations, we predicted a slow down at Infosys. And it happened.

As the board at Infosys started to understand the same things that we called out, they made some interesting moves; and we’re largely supportive of the moves. If they want Infosys to be a leading high-tech firm, they need to bring in different leadership. They did that by bringing in an external executive as the new CEO in 2014. And it’s clear that the firm’s leadership is now deploying a customer-facing strategy rather than continuing to be inward-looking. This isn’t just a story line; Infosys is backing up its statements with investments in new leadership talent over the past two months as well as in other actions.

Before, we saw a once-proud firm with internal problems, which talked the talk but didn’t walk the walk. We increasingly see Infosys pivot strongly to next-generation leadership, taking steps to give the firm a chance at success again.

It’s too early to say whether the recent moves and strategy will work. And as I said in my earlier blog, execution eats strategy. But the next step in strategy is putting their money where their mouth is, and there is every sign that Infosys is starting to do that. As such, we applaud Infosys’ progress.

As we called out Infosys when we saw problems, we now comment on it as it moves forward. To date, history validated our point of view. Now that Infosys is dealing with its issues and taking consistent actions to move the firm forward, we’ve acknowledged their progress and amended our point of view accordingly.


Photo credit: Infosys

 

Is Infosys Repositioning as a Silicon Valley Company? | Sherpas in Blue Shirts

At Everest Group, we’ve heard industry rumors that Infosys CEO Vishal Sikka – formerly on SAP’s Executive Board and global lead for products and innovation – recently hired two former SAP executives based in Silicon Valley. This move comes on the heels of Sikka planning to invest in startups in Silicon Valley. What does all this mean for Infosys and for the rest of the services industry?

Upon hiring Sikka from SAP, we knew Infosys was changing its direction to become an IP company, and we expected him to make significant changes. In addition to his former exec role at SAP, he earlier worked in Xerox’s research lab in Palo Alto in the Valley. He is a well-known figure in the American software world, and he continues to be based out of Silicon Valley.

As I predicted in a blog three months ago, Sikka had begun the transformation and I thought his next step would be to build on the Infosys talent pool by bringing in selected additional talent. Now he has done that and is using his relationships at SAP in Silicon Valley to recruit other executives to join him at Infosys.

This move means a number of things. Most importantly, it means that Infosys drinks its own champagne. Following Cognizant’s example, Infosys is establishing North American headquarters – but going one better. Rather than basing its business in New Jersey as Cognizant did, Infosys is building on its next-generation theme and basing its American business in Silicon Valley. This strategy has a number of potentially positive attributes for Infosys.

Commitment to disruptive technology wave 

First, it helps reinforce the brand that Infosys is committing to the “leading technology” aspect of its new-and-renew strategy. And lining up Silicon Valley executives to supplement the Infosys leadership team is another clear demonstration of its strategy.

Significantly, having North American headquarters in the middle of the Silicon Valley ecosystem allows Infosys to tap into the Valley’s rich innovation talent pool as Infosys moves from its traditional labor arbitrage-based model to an IP-based model. It also places Infosys close to its customer base. Soon to be gone are the days of the factory control from Bangalore dictating to customers how to use services.

I think this speaks volumes around the provider’s commitment and willingness to stay the course and pace as the services industry evolves with the digital world’s new technologies and new business models. Infosys is trying to catch that wave of next-generation digital disruptive technology that emanates from Silicon Valley’s ecosystem.

Sikka talks about Design Thinking, which puts him right into the heart of how Silicon Valley thinks and tries to behave. Infosys is making a commitment to be at the heart of the Valley’s ecosystem to better leverage that thinking. Bangalore is a long way from that ecosystem. New Jersey is closer, but Infosys chose to be in the heart of it, right in the Valley.

Will Infosys succeed in these new moves? 

I think this starts to ask hard questions of the rest of the industry, and I believe the rest of the industry will watch Infosys intently to gauge its success. In the event that Infosys succeeds in making this pivot, I think we can expect other Indian pure-plays to follow suit quickly.


Photo credit: Flickr

Have a question?

Please let us know how we can help you.

Contact us

Email us

How can we engage?

Please let us know how we can help you on your journey.