“Why didn’t you ask for 10 days instead of three, or simply refuse to do the new module? I would have understood had you tried to explain the process to me.” [Customer, on provider not delivering within deadline due to over commitment]
“You are just too pushy. Don’t you understand, a 72-days credit period means three months? If you can’t meet your collection target, it’s your problem. You can’t load it on me.” [Customer, on provider following up for early payment release]
Managing long-distance relationships in the offshore outsource industry is not easy. It gets particularly difficult when the service provider is a small-time provider. Working with small teams and poorly defined processes, such providers are under constant pressure to deliver. Since they have few clients, they often resort to putting the same team to work on multiple projects.
While there are perfectly good reasons to outsource to a small-time provider, there are a few things that customers should watch out for. Service providers often:
• | Do not say no to unrealistic customer demands. |
• | Deploy fewer people to increase productivity. |
• | Deploy non-professional resources to manage the client-vendor relationship. |
• | Accept more and more new businesses to meet revenue targets, without having the resources to handle the work. |
Never Say No
Customers often find service providers agreeing to their ‘unrealistic’ demands and then not delivering on them. This can be seen from the sales people, who make the first contact with the customer, and goes down to operations and quality control.
In publishing and content assignments, for example, it isn’t uncommon for the scope of work to stretch mid-project. What one editor likes, the other may not find desirable. As a result, the number of feedback and modification rounds almost doubles. What does not change is the customer’s deadline. In its effort not to displease the client, a small-time provider is often not able to draw the lines and goes on accepting unrealistic demands for modifications. This leads to delay in other deliverables, heartburn and bad relationships.
Customers must ensure that their provider is not suffering from the ‘never say no’ syndrome. They need to be aware of these cultural issues and perhaps regard the provider’s commitments with a pinch of salt. Setting expectations with the provider team is not sufficient; customers need to regularly reinforce it.
Fewer People
Business pressures often lead smaller providers to accept projects with unrealistic deadlines and at very low cost. To meet costs and increase project productivity, providers often cut on manpower. As the constricted provider team works over time, it falters on deliverables and the customer-provider relationship suffers.
The more the transparency in this business, the better it works. Customers should try to work with the provider team to draw up a resource list. But, do approach this diplomatically since the provider often sees this as encroachment on his privacy. For an open-minded provider, this can become a platform to negotiate more practical deadlines and milestones, and this is how both sides should look at it. However, as with all other systems, this is likely to crumble if not monitored closely. Insist on constructively discussing resource plans and reports regularly. Most importantly, try to gain the provider’s trust in such issues.
Mis-managers
Service providers do not always invest in well-trained relationship mangers capable of taking up the customer management role without the pressure of delivery. They see them as high-priced overheads. In India, at least, where the outsourcing industry is fairly mature, it is not difficult to find capable managers. It’s just a question of how much the provider is willing to invest in a critical resource.
Customers should request to see the credentials of the relationship manager. It will also help to have an informal chat with him before the project begins. If apprehensive of the manager’s capabilities, ask for a replacement. This is the most critical resource that can cause the success or failure of an offshore relationship.
Typically, the relationship manager should not be the one managing delivery. It will be a good idea to invest some time in training the relationship manager about your expectations, mode of working, cultural differences which may crop up and possible solutions.
The Target Axe
The provider’s sales team mostly ends up over-committing to the customer due to the perpetually hanging revenue target axe. Prevarication and lies follow, exasperating not just the customer but also the provider’s management. Customers must watch out for such over commitment.
Be wary of vendors that offer rock-bottom prices or promise to do a job in half the time. A lot of startups take this route to gain entry into a new market. Chances are they will not deliver or the quality will be below standard. Putting heavy penalty clauses in the SLA can deter the provider from over-commitment. Doing repetitive business with a provider helps. It takes time to develop a provider, but the initial cost spent on training and setup brings down the overall cost in the long run. It also gives you a good idea of the commitment ratio and business style of the vendor. You stand on more solid and known grounds.
Watertight SLAs alone are not sufficient to make a relationship work. It is real people on either side who make the relationship work. So, both the customer and the provider must invest in time and money in their people; once they do that, their people will ensure that the relationship works.
没有评论:
发表评论