3 ms·
In my observation, outsourcing is caught in the middle here. The work that was outsourced is (a) formulaic, (b) simple enough to be clearly documented, & (c) h
by ethbr1 2y ago
In my observation, outsourcing is caught in the middle here.
The work that was outsourced is (a) formulaic, (b) simple enough to be clearly documented, & (c) high-volume.
That's literally the wish list for good automation opportunities: why have a human automaton do something when a CPU can? Especially when you've already documented it ad nauseum.
And to large degree, this is a problem of large outsourcing shops' own making. They were content to get fat and dumb off labor arbitrage vs upskilling their talent and trying to provide higher value-add.
They all have their tiger teams, but the bulk revenue is putting lower-cost employees on higher-billable-rate contracts.
- abakker 2y agoA core issue here, though, is that contracts add a wrinkle into the "automate everything" approach. Often, it is the clients themselves who resist adopting the automations proposed by the outsourcers. It's why, when businesses say they want efficiency, I start with the Efficiency = Output / Cost equation and ask if they want to increase output, or decrease cost. Most companies buying outsourcing want to reduce cost, most outsourcing providers want to increase output.