One of China's leading IT services companies, Beyondsoft Co. Ltd. is planning to enter India's booming IT/BPO segment by the end of the first quarter of fiscal 2007-08.
'We are planning to enter India in a very big way in the BPO and ITO - sectors,' Jonathan C.Chu, vice president, Beyondsoft, told IANS on the margins of the India Leadership Forum organized by NASSCOM - here.
Refusing to give any financial details Chu said: 'We are palnning invest several million dollars here.'
The company works for global software giants such as Microsoft, IBM, HP, SAP and Oracle in software development, testing and localization, and it has grown from a small firm of 100 people in 2001 to one of China's major software outsourcing providers.
The $45 million group now employs 800 developers and boasts of headcount of over 1600.
'We will open our first unit by the first quarter of the coming fiscal. We plan to hire over 100 people in our first year of operation and our revenue target for the first year would be over $1 million - $2 million,' Chu added.
'India is a very strategic market for us and we hope to grow here. The IT market here is more sophisticated and mature whereas Chinese companies are gradually coming up.'
2/10/2007
China fast catching up with India in outsourcing
China is fast catching up with India by offering cost-effective outsourcing services with the latest success being US telecom giant Avaya setting up a large facility in the country, a research firm said.
According to a recent report from callcenters.Net, an Asian research firm, China's call centre industry is set to grow 22 per cent this year.
The size of the industry's labour force, including bank hotline services and it companies' technical support staff, will hit 158,000 this year, up from 130,000 last year, registering a 22 per cent increase.
In India, the work force is seen rising 16 per cent to 312,500, Sydney-based research firm callcentres.Net said.
Although the size of China's Call Centre industry is just half that of India's, experts said china's high productivity and cost-effective human resources will attract more multinationals to set up centres in the country.
Avaya has set up an "intelligent communications centre" in Dalian city in North-East China, as part of the company's commitment to the local government in June last year to help turn the booming city into a call centre hub for China and other northeast Asian markets, the state media reported today.
The centre, located in the Dalian software park, will also be Avaya's software and service headquarters for the Asia-Pacific region, senior vice-president of Avaya Global Services Francis Scricco said.
According to a report by US Consultancy Frost & Sullivan, Avaya tops China's call centre products and services market with a share of about 20 per cent.
However, things are changing rapidly. For example, multinationals including Dell Inc, Motorola and HP have shifted their call centres to China to take advantage of its cheap labour, 'China Daily' reported.
Domestic firms such as China mobile and Bank of China have also begun to establish their own call centres with advanced communication systems.
China is keen to enter the outsourcing business and has sent a number of delegations to India to study the working of Indian call centres.
However, poor English language skills seem to be a major problem for the Chinese to compete with Indians.
China, known as the world's factory, is also keen for an image makeover. Chinese leaders have emphasised that the country should encourage service sector as a new area for high growth along with hi-tech manufacturing while cutting down on low-end manufacturing.
According to a recent report from callcenters.Net, an Asian research firm, China's call centre industry is set to grow 22 per cent this year.
The size of the industry's labour force, including bank hotline services and it companies' technical support staff, will hit 158,000 this year, up from 130,000 last year, registering a 22 per cent increase.
In India, the work force is seen rising 16 per cent to 312,500, Sydney-based research firm callcentres.Net said.
Although the size of China's Call Centre industry is just half that of India's, experts said china's high productivity and cost-effective human resources will attract more multinationals to set up centres in the country.
Avaya has set up an "intelligent communications centre" in Dalian city in North-East China, as part of the company's commitment to the local government in June last year to help turn the booming city into a call centre hub for China and other northeast Asian markets, the state media reported today.
The centre, located in the Dalian software park, will also be Avaya's software and service headquarters for the Asia-Pacific region, senior vice-president of Avaya Global Services Francis Scricco said.
According to a report by US Consultancy Frost & Sullivan, Avaya tops China's call centre products and services market with a share of about 20 per cent.
However, things are changing rapidly. For example, multinationals including Dell Inc, Motorola and HP have shifted their call centres to China to take advantage of its cheap labour, 'China Daily' reported.
Domestic firms such as China mobile and Bank of China have also begun to establish their own call centres with advanced communication systems.
China is keen to enter the outsourcing business and has sent a number of delegations to India to study the working of Indian call centres.
However, poor English language skills seem to be a major problem for the Chinese to compete with Indians.
China, known as the world's factory, is also keen for an image makeover. Chinese leaders have emphasised that the country should encourage service sector as a new area for high growth along with hi-tech manufacturing while cutting down on low-end manufacturing.
2/08/2007
Satyam Launches China Development Center
Satyam Computer Services Ltd., India's fourth-largest software company, on Thursday began construction of a major development center, its largest outside India and first in China.
The groundbreaking for the center in the eastern city of Nanjing follows Satyam's announcement of plans for a software development center in Malaysia. Both are part of the company's effort to evolve into a global company, according to Virender Aggarwal, the company's senior vice president and regional director.
Hyderabad-based Satyam's expansion is aimed partly at offsetting rising costs in
India and at developing a base of skilled workers, Aggarwal said in a phone interview.
Like other Indian outsourcing companies, Satyam is trying to win clients outside the United States and Europe, looking to China, Australia and Latin America to diversify risks and build markets.
"China is one of the largest economies in the world and is likely to be the No. 2 economy in 20 years or so. It is very important that we are here," he said.
Satyam has 500 employees in China, almost all of them Chinese, at support centers in Shanghai, Beijing, the southern city of Guangzhou and the northeastern city of Dalian.
The abundance of jobs in India means workers job-hop often. China offers the advantages of a huge labor pool, a plus in Satyam's fight to recruit and retain labor, Aggarwal said.
"The labor market in Nanjing is relatively untapped," he said.
The center will be located in a high-tech zone that is expected to attract more than 300 software companies, Qi Lu, the Communist Party secretary in charge of the zone said in a statement.
Asia-Pacific, Africa and the Middle East contribute around 16 percent of Satyam's global revenue, while Europe contributes about 18 percent and the United States about 65 percent, he said.
Other Indian software companies are expanding in China, too. Infosys Technologies Ltd., India's second-largest software company, plans to open two development centers in China that will employ 6,000 people.
India's top information technology company, Tata Consultancy Services Ltd., has a joint venture agreement with three Chinese partners, with strategic investment from Microsoft Corp., to expand its operations in China.
The groundbreaking for the center in the eastern city of Nanjing follows Satyam's announcement of plans for a software development center in Malaysia. Both are part of the company's effort to evolve into a global company, according to Virender Aggarwal, the company's senior vice president and regional director.
Hyderabad-based Satyam's expansion is aimed partly at offsetting rising costs in
India and at developing a base of skilled workers, Aggarwal said in a phone interview.
Like other Indian outsourcing companies, Satyam is trying to win clients outside the United States and Europe, looking to China, Australia and Latin America to diversify risks and build markets.
"China is one of the largest economies in the world and is likely to be the No. 2 economy in 20 years or so. It is very important that we are here," he said.
Satyam has 500 employees in China, almost all of them Chinese, at support centers in Shanghai, Beijing, the southern city of Guangzhou and the northeastern city of Dalian.
The abundance of jobs in India means workers job-hop often. China offers the advantages of a huge labor pool, a plus in Satyam's fight to recruit and retain labor, Aggarwal said.
"The labor market in Nanjing is relatively untapped," he said.
The center will be located in a high-tech zone that is expected to attract more than 300 software companies, Qi Lu, the Communist Party secretary in charge of the zone said in a statement.
Asia-Pacific, Africa and the Middle East contribute around 16 percent of Satyam's global revenue, while Europe contributes about 18 percent and the United States about 65 percent, he said.
Other Indian software companies are expanding in China, too. Infosys Technologies Ltd., India's second-largest software company, plans to open two development centers in China that will employ 6,000 people.
India's top information technology company, Tata Consultancy Services Ltd., has a joint venture agreement with three Chinese partners, with strategic investment from Microsoft Corp., to expand its operations in China.
Are US engineers up to the global challenge?
Competition is fierce, the need to innovate and be productive never greater. Alan Earls asks, are US engineers up to the challenge?
Despite its eroding leadership position in many key industries over the past quarter century, the US still possesses an enviable collection of innovative and profitable “thoroughbreds”—industry-leading companies like Intel and HP.
But the strategic and long-term picture is more muddled. Does the US have enough engineers—and enough of the right kind—to sustain its leading enterprises and grow the next generation of success stories? Thanks to a lack of interest among young people, fewer talented individuals are going into engineering. What’s more, an increasing number of US-based companies seem happy to play the labor arbitrage game, either outsourcing manufacturing tasks or simply setting up shop in places like India or China, where eager young engineers are happy to tackle any challenge at a cost far below that in the US. This brain drain of skills and intellectual capital has some worried that the US may devolve into a nation only able to consume and unable to add value to raw materials. That would leave the US strategically dependent on others for almost all of its manufactured goods.
Ron Hira, assistant professor of public policy at Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT) and an expert in offshore outsourcing and industrial policy, is one of those who are concerned. “I think engineers contribute in a large degree to US productivity and competitiveness—for one thing, about 65 percent of American R&D is done in the manufacturing sector,” he says. Yet Hira observes a pervasive attitude that if US companies can buy something cheaper in China or India, that’s good because it helps the bottom line. “It is much better to design and manufacture things here because of the local spillover benefits” such as job creation and entrepreneurship by engineers themselves.
Those offshore engineers may be plentiful, but are they better? “The discussion on engineering resources has focused far too much on quantity rather than quality,” says Hira. For example, he notes that major business groups like the Business Roundtable have recommended that the US double its number of engineering graduates. However, this would require huge government resources, since engineering education is heavily subsidized. Instead, Hira suggests we think more about how we differentiate our students from what can be taught in India or China. “If my cousins in India can do the same work for one-fifth of the salary, then companies will begin hiring them instead of me,” says Hira. “We need to figure out what’s going to stay and what’s going to go, and what skills are needed for those jobs.”
Does our existing pool of engineers have the skills for today’s jobs? “If technological change is moving faster, as most people claim, then the obsolescence cycles are probably getting shorter,” says Hira. Quoting William A. Wulf, president of the National Academy of Engineering (NAE), Hira notes that the half-life of an engineer has gotten shorter. This means that continuing education is more critical for engineers than ever before. But the support mechanism of company subsidies has been largely dismantled because employees stay in jobs for shorter durations and companies no longer see benefit in paying tuition. It also means that companies, when they can, likely favor recent graduates over mid-career or older ones.
Wulf points to the conclusions of a recent NAE report, “Rising Above the Gathering Storm.” The report argues that although the US engineering is very competitive now, there are disturbing signs that our competitiveness is in peril. “We need to do a set of things now to ensure future security and prosperity,” says Wulf; in particular, he says, we need to support the traditional US advantage—innovation—through better education at all levels and more support of research.
“Engineers are the principal source of innovation and have done very well for us,” says Wulf. If the US is to continue to prosper, Wulf suggests that it must prepare engineers for the 21st century, not the 20th. “I am concerned that our Achilles’ heel is that engineering education has changed very little since I was an undergraduate more than 45 years ago,” he adds. Meanwhile, the quality of engineering education abroad is increasing dramatically, shrinking a traditional US lead.
The quality of engineering education and of engineers is also very much on the mind of Bernard M. Gordon, a pioneer in high-tech electronics since the 1950s and a philanthropist who has supported a number of engineering initiatives at MIT, Tufts University, and Northeastern University. Gordon says the problem goes beyond low enrollment, though he acknowledges that issue is important.
Instead, Gordon believes that American engineers are no longer trained to be effective or managed correctly to produce results. They have learned science but forgotten engineering. As a consequence, he suspects the productivity of individual engineers, in terms of the dollar value of products attributable to their efforts, has slipped. He blames a combination of poor attitude among engineers and an emphasis in colleges on scientific training over practical problem-solving skills. Additionally, he says, engineers in the workplace are not monitored and mentored to help them hone and mature their skills.
Although Gordon says he has been raising the alarm on the topic for decades, today there seem to be others sharing his concern. For instance, Dave Gardner, principal of Gardner & Associates Consulting (Reno, NV), says engineers in the US don’t seem to understand the huge difference between research and development (where the focus is really on research) and actual product development. “The vast majority of engineers are involved in product development but seem to behave as though they are in R&D—in other words, they don’t take responsibility for many of the downstream issues that they create,” he says.
“Sadly, too many engineers don’t like to ‘get their hands dirty’ with the day-to-day issues that allow a product to be easily produced. This is particularly true in situation where parts, subassemblies and turnkey products are being outsourced more and more.”
Exacerbating the problem, Gardner says most engineers prefer to talk only to other engineers and, therefore, don’t like to engage directly in the challenges that suppliers and their manufacturing counterparts have producing parts and subassemblies. “It is almost as though these ‘mundane’ issues are beneath them,” he says.
Fixing engineering may not be easy, but it can be done, says Wulf, who points to a recent NAE report that proposes extensive reforms to engineering education (see sidebar). However, he cautions, it’s not about being nationalistic. “I am not one of those who believe we have to do ‘better’ than, say, India or China—on the contrary, I believe we are safer if those countries, and the rest of the developing world, prosper as part of a global economy.” On the other hand, “I don’t want us to fall behind them either, and right now I see them as hungrier than we seem to be.”
Furthermore, Wulf sees a nation that needs more leadership from engineers. “In China, about half of the cabinet ministers were trained as engineers. There are lots of reasons for their incredible economic growth, but I am convinced that a major one is the way those engineers think about their country’s problems and opportunities.”
Despite its eroding leadership position in many key industries over the past quarter century, the US still possesses an enviable collection of innovative and profitable “thoroughbreds”—industry-leading companies like Intel and HP.
But the strategic and long-term picture is more muddled. Does the US have enough engineers—and enough of the right kind—to sustain its leading enterprises and grow the next generation of success stories? Thanks to a lack of interest among young people, fewer talented individuals are going into engineering. What’s more, an increasing number of US-based companies seem happy to play the labor arbitrage game, either outsourcing manufacturing tasks or simply setting up shop in places like India or China, where eager young engineers are happy to tackle any challenge at a cost far below that in the US. This brain drain of skills and intellectual capital has some worried that the US may devolve into a nation only able to consume and unable to add value to raw materials. That would leave the US strategically dependent on others for almost all of its manufactured goods.
Ron Hira, assistant professor of public policy at Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT) and an expert in offshore outsourcing and industrial policy, is one of those who are concerned. “I think engineers contribute in a large degree to US productivity and competitiveness—for one thing, about 65 percent of American R&D is done in the manufacturing sector,” he says. Yet Hira observes a pervasive attitude that if US companies can buy something cheaper in China or India, that’s good because it helps the bottom line. “It is much better to design and manufacture things here because of the local spillover benefits” such as job creation and entrepreneurship by engineers themselves.
Those offshore engineers may be plentiful, but are they better? “The discussion on engineering resources has focused far too much on quantity rather than quality,” says Hira. For example, he notes that major business groups like the Business Roundtable have recommended that the US double its number of engineering graduates. However, this would require huge government resources, since engineering education is heavily subsidized. Instead, Hira suggests we think more about how we differentiate our students from what can be taught in India or China. “If my cousins in India can do the same work for one-fifth of the salary, then companies will begin hiring them instead of me,” says Hira. “We need to figure out what’s going to stay and what’s going to go, and what skills are needed for those jobs.”
Does our existing pool of engineers have the skills for today’s jobs? “If technological change is moving faster, as most people claim, then the obsolescence cycles are probably getting shorter,” says Hira. Quoting William A. Wulf, president of the National Academy of Engineering (NAE), Hira notes that the half-life of an engineer has gotten shorter. This means that continuing education is more critical for engineers than ever before. But the support mechanism of company subsidies has been largely dismantled because employees stay in jobs for shorter durations and companies no longer see benefit in paying tuition. It also means that companies, when they can, likely favor recent graduates over mid-career or older ones.
Wulf points to the conclusions of a recent NAE report, “Rising Above the Gathering Storm.” The report argues that although the US engineering is very competitive now, there are disturbing signs that our competitiveness is in peril. “We need to do a set of things now to ensure future security and prosperity,” says Wulf; in particular, he says, we need to support the traditional US advantage—innovation—through better education at all levels and more support of research.
“Engineers are the principal source of innovation and have done very well for us,” says Wulf. If the US is to continue to prosper, Wulf suggests that it must prepare engineers for the 21st century, not the 20th. “I am concerned that our Achilles’ heel is that engineering education has changed very little since I was an undergraduate more than 45 years ago,” he adds. Meanwhile, the quality of engineering education abroad is increasing dramatically, shrinking a traditional US lead.
The quality of engineering education and of engineers is also very much on the mind of Bernard M. Gordon, a pioneer in high-tech electronics since the 1950s and a philanthropist who has supported a number of engineering initiatives at MIT, Tufts University, and Northeastern University. Gordon says the problem goes beyond low enrollment, though he acknowledges that issue is important.
Instead, Gordon believes that American engineers are no longer trained to be effective or managed correctly to produce results. They have learned science but forgotten engineering. As a consequence, he suspects the productivity of individual engineers, in terms of the dollar value of products attributable to their efforts, has slipped. He blames a combination of poor attitude among engineers and an emphasis in colleges on scientific training over practical problem-solving skills. Additionally, he says, engineers in the workplace are not monitored and mentored to help them hone and mature their skills.
Although Gordon says he has been raising the alarm on the topic for decades, today there seem to be others sharing his concern. For instance, Dave Gardner, principal of Gardner & Associates Consulting (Reno, NV), says engineers in the US don’t seem to understand the huge difference between research and development (where the focus is really on research) and actual product development. “The vast majority of engineers are involved in product development but seem to behave as though they are in R&D—in other words, they don’t take responsibility for many of the downstream issues that they create,” he says.
“Sadly, too many engineers don’t like to ‘get their hands dirty’ with the day-to-day issues that allow a product to be easily produced. This is particularly true in situation where parts, subassemblies and turnkey products are being outsourced more and more.”
Exacerbating the problem, Gardner says most engineers prefer to talk only to other engineers and, therefore, don’t like to engage directly in the challenges that suppliers and their manufacturing counterparts have producing parts and subassemblies. “It is almost as though these ‘mundane’ issues are beneath them,” he says.
Fixing engineering may not be easy, but it can be done, says Wulf, who points to a recent NAE report that proposes extensive reforms to engineering education (see sidebar). However, he cautions, it’s not about being nationalistic. “I am not one of those who believe we have to do ‘better’ than, say, India or China—on the contrary, I believe we are safer if those countries, and the rest of the developing world, prosper as part of a global economy.” On the other hand, “I don’t want us to fall behind them either, and right now I see them as hungrier than we seem to be.”
Furthermore, Wulf sees a nation that needs more leadership from engineers. “In China, about half of the cabinet ministers were trained as engineers. There are lots of reasons for their incredible economic growth, but I am convinced that a major one is the way those engineers think about their country’s problems and opportunities.”
2/06/2007
Neusoft Listed in the 2007 Global Services 100
The Global Services 100 List, a
compilation of the world's most innovative service providers selected on
the basis of a research study, has been jointly released by Global Services
and neoIT, an outsourcing advisory firm. Neusoft, a leading software and
solution provider in China, was listed amongst the ''Global Services 100''
for the third time, and was also ranked No.1 in the ''Top 10 to Watch in
Emerging Asian Markets.'' Last year Neusoft was listed the leader of the
''Top 5 to Watch in China.'' Neusoft's Vice-president & CTO Walter Fang
attended the 2007 Global Services Conference held on Jan. 31 in New York,
and delivered a speech on behalf of Neusoft.
It is reported that Neusoft has 15 years of experience in software and
service outsourcing and has been ranked No. 1 in offshore outsourcing
revenue among all software outsourcers in China for three consecutive
years.
In 2006, the company continued its input in software and service
outsourcing by proactively taking in more high-quality talents. By the year
end, the number of employees that are engaged in offshore software and
service outsourcing at Neusoft has reached 4,000, functioning as a
high-quality R&D team capable of coping with the continuously increasing
demands of clients all over the world. Also in this year, Neusoft's
software outsourcing and BPO business was certified by ISO27001, becoming
the first software company to have passed the certification both in
software outsourcing and BPO business in China. The year also witnessed a
major breakthrough in market expansion, especially in Europe and America,
contributing to a more than 50% growth in software outsourcing over the
previous year. Further more, the company has accelerated its pace in
outsourcing service base construction by establishing international bases
in Dalian, Shanghai, Nanjing, and Chengdu respectively, which may help
develop more software and service outsourcing businesses.
Neusoft's Vice-president & CTO Walter Fang said, ''Chinese software
companies are growing more and more mature, attracting more trust from
European and American clients. They will definitely become a major force in
global software & service cooperation. Neusoft has obtained recognition
from the global community for its outstanding performance and high-speed
growth, which will create a solid foundation for its further participation
into the global competition.''
compilation of the world's most innovative service providers selected on
the basis of a research study, has been jointly released by Global Services
and neoIT, an outsourcing advisory firm. Neusoft, a leading software and
solution provider in China, was listed amongst the ''Global Services 100''
for the third time, and was also ranked No.1 in the ''Top 10 to Watch in
Emerging Asian Markets.'' Last year Neusoft was listed the leader of the
''Top 5 to Watch in China.'' Neusoft's Vice-president & CTO Walter Fang
attended the 2007 Global Services Conference held on Jan. 31 in New York,
and delivered a speech on behalf of Neusoft.
It is reported that Neusoft has 15 years of experience in software and
service outsourcing and has been ranked No. 1 in offshore outsourcing
revenue among all software outsourcers in China for three consecutive
years.
In 2006, the company continued its input in software and service
outsourcing by proactively taking in more high-quality talents. By the year
end, the number of employees that are engaged in offshore software and
service outsourcing at Neusoft has reached 4,000, functioning as a
high-quality R&D team capable of coping with the continuously increasing
demands of clients all over the world. Also in this year, Neusoft's
software outsourcing and BPO business was certified by ISO27001, becoming
the first software company to have passed the certification both in
software outsourcing and BPO business in China. The year also witnessed a
major breakthrough in market expansion, especially in Europe and America,
contributing to a more than 50% growth in software outsourcing over the
previous year. Further more, the company has accelerated its pace in
outsourcing service base construction by establishing international bases
in Dalian, Shanghai, Nanjing, and Chengdu respectively, which may help
develop more software and service outsourcing businesses.
Neusoft's Vice-president & CTO Walter Fang said, ''Chinese software
companies are growing more and more mature, attracting more trust from
European and American clients. They will definitely become a major force in
global software & service cooperation. Neusoft has obtained recognition
from the global community for its outstanding performance and high-speed
growth, which will create a solid foundation for its further participation
into the global competition.''
订阅：
博文 (Atom)
