4 Outsourcing Lessons IT Can Learn From Automakers - InformationWeek

InformationWeek is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

IoT
IoT
IT Leadership // Enterprise Agility
Commentary
9/25/2014
12:03 AM
100%
0%

4 Outsourcing Lessons IT Can Learn From Automakers

Automakers get 80% of a vehicle's components from suppliers. Why are they better at outsourcing than IT?

As many companies have discovered, much to their dismay, IT outsourcing doesn't always go as planned. In case after case, the lower costs, better service quality, and greater agility everyone was expecting turn out to be elusive. Looking for lessons in failed engagements has become a virtual pastime for the IT sector, yet the disappointments continue. Perhaps it is time to draw insights on outsourcing from another sector -- specifically from one that does a better job of it, the automotive industry.

Carmakers delegate up to 80% of their production to suppliers, and they've had decades to work on the relationship. The effort has definitely paid off: Auto manufacturers have created an environment where suppliers are continually challenged to deliver improvements, and to deliver them cost-effectively. For example, profit margins for the 10 largest automotive suppliers averaged 4.1% between 2010 and 2013 -- compared to 8.4% for the top 10 IT providers. Yet crucially, it is an environment in which both automaker and supplier benefit.

By following four sourcing strategies from automakers, companies will be better able to foster innovation and efficiency in their IT outsourcing. Just as important, it will spur companies to manage IT as a core component of their business. Because increasingly, that is exactly what IT is. At many companies, however, IT is still seen as a supporting player (even automakers don't always give IT sourcing the attention they give to the procurement of vehicle parts). This second-string status may have sufficed in the old days, when IT wasn't "what the business is about," but not anymore.

(Image credit: Steve Jurvetson via Flickr)
(Image credit: Steve Jurvetson via Flickr)

1. Retain expertise
As companies outsource more IT functions, their technology expertise is dwindling. This makes it difficult to evaluate services and know if they're really getting what they need for what they're paying. Automakers avoid this problem by retaining engineering expertise even as they source great swaths of work. One way is to keep the production of certain parts in-house. BMW, for example, produces some car seats internally, as well as parts for the drivetrain and other systems. Another strategy is to do the initial production of a new technology in-house, in order to understand it before delegating it to a provider.

[Do you understand why big data is important? Read Data Science That Makes a Difference.]

Rebuilding IT expertise will take time, so companies should get on their way. They can decide if any outsourced services could be taken back in-house, and add technical experts to their procurement teams. They can prioritize emerging key technologies, such as virtualization and the cloud, and gradually build skills by hiring or developing the necessary talent. Finally, sourcing and vendor management must become integrated parts of an IT career path and not treated as an end station, as is sometimes the case.

2. Pay attention to processes that provide an edge
Automakers are careful to avoid a one-size-fits-all approach to sourcing. For parts that can help a vehicle stand out in the market, the sourcing relationship is more nuanced and hands-on than it would be for more commoditized components. Critical components may involve more collaboration or even joint development, for example. At several premium European car manufacturers, the lighting system is seen as something that can set a vehicle apart, so those companies work closely with suppliers to develop innovative offerings such as laser headlamps.

In IT, on the other hand, all outsourced processes -- whether a "differentiator" or a more commoditized task -- tend to be handled in the similar, hands-off fashion, with the company relying on the vendor to get things right. The automotive industry approach would let companies' in-house IT teams focus their efforts where the payoff would be greatest. For instance, at a logistics company, one differentiating process might be the routing of trucks. The IT application that supports that routing should be flagged for special treatment, such as stepped-up collaboration or supervision. For here, improvements aren't just beneficial, they can bring competitive advantage. 

3. Challenge suppliers to deliver improvements
Automakers continually demand that their suppliers improve performance and lower costs. They do this by always having another supplier in the wings. Multiple suppliers will be asked to present prototypes. Multiple suppliers will be chosen for further development. As production nears, yet another vendor will often be added to the mix. Even after assembly starts, dual sourcing is common. There is always someone else to whom the automaker can turn.

This system works not only because suppliers know they can be replaced if they don't keep the improvements coming, but because they, too, can come out ahead. When suppliers perform well, they can be rewarded with long-term and even increasing work. When they don't win an assignment, the improvements they did make put them in better position to win work elsewhere.

IT sourcing rarely sees such alignment of interests. In many engagements, ambiguous contracts, hands-off management, and difficulty switching providers (or a reluctance to do so) give vendors little reason to focus on improvements. To get closer to the automobile model, IT organizations should move to standardized environments when possible, particularly in the cloud. They should also consider the "champion-challenger" model, where one provider does the bulk of the work, but another does some of it (and can step in further if necessary). Another approach is to assign one provider the execution of a task, but give another a quality control role, making sure the work gets done. 

4. Emphasize transparency
Automakers are watchdogs. Manufacturers like Renault and BMW have teams of employees calculating the cost base of suppliers. By understanding the costs for materials, labor, and so on, car companies gain insight not only into what they should be paying but also where problems may be lurking. Meanwhile, automakers like Toyota leverage close working relationships -- and freer flows of information -- to foster transparency.

IT organizations, which typically pay for services on a volume-centric measure -- be it MIPS, terabytes, or number of transactions -- rarely have such an inside view. To gain such a view, they could devote procurement staff to better understanding costs, as well as promote more dialogue and information sharing with providers. As procurement staff members develop more expertise, they'll be better able to evaluate the pricing and quality of the services they are sourcing.

There is a reason IT organizations embrace outsourcing: It can really deliver benefits. But to see them, companies need to get back in the driver's seat, creating the right incentives, and balance, in their sourcing relationships. By embracing these four lessons from the auto industry, they can do just that -- and enjoy a smoother road ahead.

Need to deepen your tech leadership skills, or those of your team? Join me at the one-day InformationWeek Leadership Summit Sept. 30 in New York City for an interactive workshop with top IT leaders. Use promotion code BLSUMMIT for a half-off discount for InformationWeek readers.

Heiner Himmelreich is a partner, managing director, and global topic leader for IT sourcing at The Boston Consulting Group. He is a member of global leadership team of BCG's Technology Advantage Practice. View Full Bio
We welcome your comments on this topic on our social media channels, or [contact us directly] with questions about the site.
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
SaneIT
100%
0%
SaneIT,
User Rank: Ninja
10/3/2014 | 7:59:37 AM
Re: Don't Confuse Outsourcing with Offshoring
@hh0927,

I see the same mindset, it's not outsourcing unless the job is going overseas, but I think that's just a funny way our language works.  Companies subcontract jobs to the business down the street and it feels different because they can pop in to check out the progress and feel like they have more input.  Outsourcing in our language feels like letting go and letting someone else do everything within the parameters of the contract.  It doesn't have to be that different but since it often feels different to us we tend to refer to it in different ways. We use a lot of freelance labor because keeping a full time staff would be crippling during our slow periods.  When we ramp up we need reliable people who work like they are full time staff so we treat them as such.  The only difference is on paper and that's really how outsourcing to a local company should work.

 
batye
50%
50%
batye,
User Rank: Ninja
10/1/2014 | 12:31:56 AM
Re: service vs products
@nasimson I could not agree more, and I trust you are right... as we need to see this point...  product and service... but this days this line is getting thinner... as service become product or product get sold as a service... how I see it...
batye
50%
50%
batye,
User Rank: Ninja
10/1/2014 | 12:20:25 AM
Re: Don't Confuse Outsourcing with Offshoring
@hho927 it seems like happens everywhere... what ever we like it or not... sad reality of our global economy...
nasimson
100%
0%
nasimson,
User Rank: Ninja
9/30/2014 | 12:33:49 PM
service vs products
We are missing on one important factor here:

Automakers source for component parts. Thats a product.

IT outsourcers source for IT services. Thats a service. 

The intangibility, human element, non-storage, lack of standardization and age of discipline, distance between principal and outsourcer, difficulty to audit ... all these create lot of difference. And these differences are critical.
hho927
50%
50%
hho927,
User Rank: Ninja
9/29/2014 | 4:38:44 PM
Re: Don't Confuse Outsourcing with Offshoring
I don't know but after working for several companies.

When we say outsource, it means jobs are giving to oversea.

If we move some work to domestic companies, we call them subcontractors/IT consulting.
Number 6
50%
50%
Number 6,
User Rank: Moderator
9/29/2014 | 12:59:09 PM
Don't Confuse Outsourcing with Offshoring
Some commenters are confusing the two terms.

Outsourcing is moving a process or function from your firm to another firm. It can be in the same country. This is what the article is about.

Offshoring is moving a process or function to another country. It can be another office of the same firm.

Offshore outsourcing is the combination of the two: another firm in another country.
SunitaT0
50%
50%
SunitaT0,
User Rank: Ninja
9/27/2014 | 1:04:01 AM
Re: Apple VS Orange
"Software/IT can change in days. That's the reason Agile software developement method is the most pouplar method. We outsourced some of our work, seriously! It takes more time to explain, re-write requirements for oversea programmers than to do it ourself."
@hho297: Surely there are some overheads for outsourcing stuff (especially software) but we are doing this everyday. Not everything can be done under the same canopy, help is needed from everywhere. Every single company third parties some of its work for better functioning.
SunitaT0
100%
0%
SunitaT0,
User Rank: Ninja
9/27/2014 | 1:01:18 AM
Making components in-house
"As companies outsource more IT functions, their technology expertise is dwindling. This makes it difficult to evaluate services and know if they're really getting what they need for what they're paying. Automakers avoid this problem by retaining engineering expertise even as they source great swaths of work. One way is to keep the production of certain parts in-house. "



Having certain production parts in house means better control on finances and managerial abilities. It is true that not all work should be availed from third parties. Internal factories have to come in the equation as well. We're thinking better equipment=third parties but that isn't always the case. Third parties are nt associated with the design and work principles in-house therefore there is a mismatch when it comes to work.
hho927
50%
50%
hho927,
User Rank: Ninja
9/26/2014 | 1:10:45 PM
Apple VS Orange
The combustion engine is still the same for centuries (maybe it get more efficient but that's about it)

The connectors shape may be change. But they are still the same for centuries.

The frame/body may change yearly.

Software/IT can change in days. That's the reason Agile software developement method is the most pouplar method. We outsourced some of our work, seriously! It takes more time to explain, re-write requirements for oversea programmers than to do it ourself.
yalanand
50%
50%
yalanand,
User Rank: Ninja
9/26/2014 | 12:18:20 PM
Re: Too many components
@zaious: Indeed. Having too many components sent offshore may be a different take on the marketing status of the automotive industry, and offshoring isn't the solution to everything. Not only are there recurred costs but there are also unforeseen expenditures if we offshore components. We can onshore components and offshore the software because software can be built anywhere with a powerful team.
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
News
The State of Chatbots: Pandemic Edition
Jessica Davis, Senior Editor, Enterprise Apps,  9/10/2020
Commentary
Deloitte on Cloud, the Edge, and Enterprise Expectations
Joao-Pierre S. Ruth, Senior Writer,  9/14/2020
Slideshows
Data Science: How the Pandemic Has Affected 10 Popular Jobs
Cynthia Harvey, Freelance Journalist, InformationWeek,  9/9/2020
White Papers
Register for InformationWeek Newsletters
Video
Current Issue
IT Automation Transforms Network Management
In this special report we will examine the layers of automation and orchestration in IT operations, and how they can provide high availability and greater scale for modern applications and business demands.
Slideshows
Flash Poll