Its been just a year since it started here and the CEO of the company i work for thinks that one thing that went horribly right was the work that was Bangalored. oh yeah and it was all in an open mail backed with nice statistics.
Originally posted by Jeroen T Wenting: Too many offshored projects fail, leading to the whole sector getting a bad name, and with the majority going to (and thus failing) in India...
I doubt.I won't say every project is grand success but success rate has to be there.Even if more than 50% of projects get success then its success.I don't think offshore companies carry extra social responsibility in India.They are here since sometime.Some are there as long as 15 years.Offshore operations may not be revenue machines but some saving must be there. IMO some offshore projects fail because of cost,retention rate and precise goal and lack of proper experience.
Originally posted by Jeroen T Wenting: "bungled up" is what we used to say. Too many offshored projects fail, leading to the whole sector getting a bad name, and with the majority going to (and thus failing) in India...
Success/failure of "offshoring" will depend on who you talk to. My company is heavily into offshoring not because the top brass saw a competitive edge but because of the venture capitalists/creditors who insist on the "India factor". The success rate of outsourcing to local vendors and offshore vendors has been the same in my company. Pathetic. I have seen successful projects developed in-house that were outsourced disastrously. Two months ago, I did an analysis of our projects portfolio and showed that most of the projects that we had outsourced were not suitable for offshoring and I even showed financially how detremental that was. Even for the ones that look good on the books, I showed that they were not functioning optimally because of many factors. But my director summed it up well:- "You are right, it is not working. But the train has already left the station and we have to make do with what we have. Else we will not get the money from our creditors who do not see IT as a core competency". For the top brass in our company, success in IT is just what percentage of work has been sent overseas and the fact that the billing rate is 1/3rd that of a local candidate.
Jeroen T Wenting
Joined: Apr 21, 2006
nowhere do I say that the only outsourced projects failing are those sent to India. I know full well that others fail as well. But it's the sheer volume going to India that gives that country a bad name (as well as persistent idea which may to a degree be true that anyone halfway competent will find a way to get on the first plane to Amsterdam, London, or the US to work there for higher wages, leaving mainly less competent people behind).
I've worked in a company that experimented with offshoring myself and the success rate there was apalling as well. 100% failure to be precise, and that despite us employing people who knew the culture and native language of the country we were offshoring to (the CEO, CTO, and CFO were all natives of that country, which was not India).
Too many offshored projects fail, leading to the whole sector getting a bad name, and with the majority going to (and thus failing) in India...
I think it's due to some bad project planning. First of all, big consulting firms are starved of experienced talent, freshers are forced to do the work that must be carried out by experienced people. Then there is tendency to complete the work with minimal cost, some times this tantamounts to carrying out the entire project with trial version softwares(I have seen it!).
Then comes the greedy deadline, aggravated by absence of experienced talent. No wonder, some projects fail miserably. [ June 05, 2006: Message edited by: Ramesh Choudhary ]