The wisest people are those who are smart enough to realize they don't know it all.
Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations Mike Lewis on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Outsourcing overrated
- Thread starter IT4EVR
- Start date
- Status
The wisest people are those who are smart enough to realize they don't know it all.
- Thread starter
- #3
Uh, well, if you haven't noticed...
Outsourcing has taken away countless jobs in America and has been one of the hotter topics of the day.
Corporate America tends to think that outsourcing is the greatest thing since the automobile.
The wisest people are those who are smart enough to realize they don't know it all.
Outsourcing has taken away countless jobs in America and has been one of the hotter topics of the day.
Corporate America tends to think that outsourcing is the greatest thing since the automobile.
The wisest people are those who are smart enough to realize they don't know it all.
- Thread starter
- #7
I thought this was an interesting article, so I posted it here. If you don't think it's newsworthy to you, you are free to ignore it. Some of these comments from the peanut gallery are kind of funny, so if you'd still like to chime in, feel free.
However, someone might think it's interesting.
The reason I posted it was because corporate america has this misconception that if they outsource some project, they will save huge amounts of money. This article disputes that. This illusion has cost a lot of American jobs.
A lot of these companies are outsourcing because they being fed a bunch of baloney about cost savings. They figure if company X is doing it, then they have to do it too. Sort of a monkey see, monkey do attitude.
The wisest people are those who are smart enough to realize they don't know it all.
However, someone might think it's interesting.
The reason I posted it was because corporate america has this misconception that if they outsource some project, they will save huge amounts of money. This article disputes that. This illusion has cost a lot of American jobs.
A lot of these companies are outsourcing because they being fed a bunch of baloney about cost savings. They figure if company X is doing it, then they have to do it too. Sort of a monkey see, monkey do attitude.
The wisest people are those who are smart enough to realize they don't know it all.
BJCooperIT
Programmer
I, too, found this an interesting read. It helped confirm my belief that some outsourcing just will not reap all of the benefits that companies thought they would. When you factor in the intangibles like:
[ul]
[li]Loss of customers who get frustrated trying to communicate with people who clearly do not understand what they are saying.[/li]
[li]The fact that your own employees may become less effective at their own jobs because they spend time supporting the "new staff" and/or no longer get the feedback they need to produce a quality product.[/li]
[li]Any remotely managed project is more likely to have a higher error rate if communication is an obstacle.[/li]
[/ul]
and the reality is, it is difficult to say what would have happened if the project had stayed in-house.
Yes, 15% may sound good on the books, but in the long run, if you want quality, you need to pay for quality.
[sup]Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.[/sup][sup] ~George Bernard Shaw[/sup]
Consultant Developer/Analyst Oracle, Forms, Reports & PL/SQL (Windows)
My website: Emu Products Plus
[ul]
[li]Loss of customers who get frustrated trying to communicate with people who clearly do not understand what they are saying.[/li]
[li]The fact that your own employees may become less effective at their own jobs because they spend time supporting the "new staff" and/or no longer get the feedback they need to produce a quality product.[/li]
[li]Any remotely managed project is more likely to have a higher error rate if communication is an obstacle.[/li]
[/ul]
and the reality is, it is difficult to say what would have happened if the project had stayed in-house.
Yes, 15% may sound good on the books, but in the long run, if you want quality, you need to pay for quality.
[sup]Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.[/sup][sup] ~George Bernard Shaw[/sup]
Consultant Developer/Analyst Oracle, Forms, Reports & PL/SQL (Windows)
My website: Emu Products Plus
Please tell me of someone you know who directly lost their IT job because it was outsourced. I worked for a Fortune 500 company and they don't outsource their java programming or IT work; I worked for a government contractor for DoD and they don't outsource their programming or IT work; I work for an Internet retailer and they don't outsource their coding or IT work.
I would really like to know from those who jump on the "outsourcing is killing IT" bandwagon what job has personally been lost to outsourcing and what you specifically did in your job.
I would really like to know from those who jump on the "outsourcing is killing IT" bandwagon what job has personally been lost to outsourcing and what you specifically did in your job.
BJCooperIT
Programmer
I lost a contracting job because the project was outsourced.
Perhaps some outsourcing does increase quality. But the software I have been "fixing" for the past nine months is of the worst quality I have ever seen. Bad code, no documentation, no consistency - obviously a product of bad communication.
[sup]Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.[/sup][sup] ~George Bernard Shaw[/sup]
Consultant Developer/Analyst Oracle, Forms, Reports & PL/SQL (Windows)
My website: Emu Products Plus
Perhaps some outsourcing does increase quality. But the software I have been "fixing" for the past nine months is of the worst quality I have ever seen. Bad code, no documentation, no consistency - obviously a product of bad communication.
[sup]Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.[/sup][sup] ~George Bernard Shaw[/sup]
Consultant Developer/Analyst Oracle, Forms, Reports & PL/SQL (Windows)
My website: Emu Products Plus
What size company did the outsourcing? What kind of project was it? Was it pure coding? Was it software engineering?
As I said, the Fortune 500 company that is developing Java code for their web site isn't going to outsource that to India. A clothing retailer in my college town (pop. 30,000) and traded on the NYSE doesn't outsource their IT work. A Fortune 1000 company in my home state in a small town (pop. 5000) doesn't outsource their IT work. They all have revenue of billions or hundreds of millions, yet their work is all done by Americans in the cities they reside in.
I would really like to know what types of companies are outsourcing their IT work and what type of work and/or project is sent overseas. I sincerely would like to understand outsourcing other than reading someone repeating media hype they read (I can do that myself).
The Wipro stuff I fixed was a situation where a rural electrical co-op hired a consulting firm from India to install/customize/bastardize a CRM system.
In my imagination at least, better communication would have prevented the need for my help. In my imagination, the country boys as the co-op asked the Indians "can we do this?" and "can we do that?" and these were interpretted as "is it possible to do these things?" The answer should have been, "While it may be technically possible, it is a very bad idea." ... you should have seen the hoops these guys went thru to implement these bad ideas. Ha!
Well, on the other hand I could just as well imagine one of the big consulting firms like Acenture, KPMG, EDS etc... doing the exact same thing just to bilk the uninformed client out of millions of dollars in development customization fees... so maybe it had nothing to do with communication... one thing is for sure, it was a clusterfark.
In my imagination at least, better communication would have prevented the need for my help. In my imagination, the country boys as the co-op asked the Indians "can we do this?" and "can we do that?" and these were interpretted as "is it possible to do these things?" The answer should have been, "While it may be technically possible, it is a very bad idea." ... you should have seen the hoops these guys went thru to implement these bad ideas. Ha!
Well, on the other hand I could just as well imagine one of the big consulting firms like Acenture, KPMG, EDS etc... doing the exact same thing just to bilk the uninformed client out of millions of dollars in development customization fees... so maybe it had nothing to do with communication... one thing is for sure, it was a clusterfark.
khz said:
You cleary asked if anyone knew someone who lost their IT job due to outsourcing Obvious BJCooperIT has. Only then to have the question of how big the company is? It doesn't matter company size or industry just becuase you don't know anyone or have not worked for a company that has outsourced doesn't mean it doesn't happen. I worked for a fortune 50 company that outsourced 2 seperate projects, the reason being lack of internal resources but this company could have easily contracted an american company to do it, which in the end they had to pay either existing employees or contract a us company to fix.
I personally know an entire development group (15 people) who lost their jobs to outsourcing. Size of the company? small. Industry? Software / Business Intelligence? Location? Heart of Silicon Valley. Reason Able to hire more bodies for less money. Outcome? Project failed.
Shoot Me! Shoot Me NOW!!!
- Daffy Duck
Outsourcing is mostly media hype and plays to the fear of people. I gave plenty of examples of good sized companies with large revenues who don't outsource and why would they? Nobody yet has given me a concrete example of what is outsourced.
What is the ratio or percentage of outsourced jobs for in-house use software vs. commercially developed software? My guess would be most of it is commercially developed software because there is too short of a turn-around and requirement definitions for in-house software. I currently work for an Internet retailer. Sometimes there have been weekly deployments. And that is after development and testing. That type of programming would never survive outsourcing and will always have a need.
That is what I am driving at.
That doesn't even come close to explaining anything. Was it just coding? Was it project development? Was it design? Was there any Americans involved in the project? What was the application development (Business Intelligence) for? Was it in-house software? Or was it being developed for commercial use?
What is the ratio or percentage of outsourced jobs for in-house use software vs. commercially developed software? My guess would be most of it is commercially developed software because there is too short of a turn-around and requirement definitions for in-house software. I currently work for an Internet retailer. Sometimes there have been weekly deployments. And that is after development and testing. That type of programming would never survive outsourcing and will always have a need.
That is what I am driving at.
trollacious
Programmer
Are you ignornig Dell's overseas tech support (absolutely HORRID)? And how about the outsourcing of medical transcription work? My wife works in that industry, and there are a LOT of complaints in the MT chat rooms about losing jobs to India or companies from India.
Lee
Lee
langleymass
MIS
Most American techies already knew that outsourcing is overrated. I love seeing it fail. But many would rather pay nothing and get nothing.
Outsourcing does not mean that everything goes outside the USA , and is not a new concept (maybe for IT people, but because this is a relatively "young" industry).
If a company have too much money, and less brain to hire consultants and believe everything these consultants are saying:
1) You need to cut costs (and it needs to be something exotic because you are paying big $$$ to the consultant)
2) Go back to your core business (if things like company mission, vision are not defined, this could mean the "core business" of the CEO which is "making lots of money without headache")
3) Get rid of the headache (we would say the workforce)
4) Gamble on the stock market
5) Merge with another company and get rid of the redundant assets/people
There must be always a reason why things go wrong, and the media is used to intoxicate the mass.
8 years ago it was the Y2K disaster, the moon did not fell down on earth so they had to invent another excuse "outsourcing"
kHz inquired about facts of outsourcing, not "gossips, rumours or hot-items in chat rooms or from the internet".
By the way from the News link that started this discussion it looks like one of the companies that receives the contracts is International Business Machines.
Anyone believing that operational costs can be reduced overnight with 60% is a potential victim of being separated from his money. Probably they also think that the fairy tale, leprechaums and Santa Claus exist.
Steven
If a company have too much money, and less brain to hire consultants and believe everything these consultants are saying:
1) You need to cut costs (and it needs to be something exotic because you are paying big $$$ to the consultant)
2) Go back to your core business (if things like company mission, vision are not defined, this could mean the "core business" of the CEO which is "making lots of money without headache")
3) Get rid of the headache (we would say the workforce)
4) Gamble on the stock market
5) Merge with another company and get rid of the redundant assets/people
There must be always a reason why things go wrong, and the media is used to intoxicate the mass.
8 years ago it was the Y2K disaster, the moon did not fell down on earth so they had to invent another excuse "outsourcing"
kHz inquired about facts of outsourcing, not "gossips, rumours or hot-items in chat rooms or from the internet".
By the way from the News link that started this discussion it looks like one of the companies that receives the contracts is International Business Machines.
It doesn't need a degree in Rocket Science or a well paid consultant to come to that extraordinary conclusion. Plain horse sense is enough.
Anyone believing that operational costs can be reduced overnight with 60% is a potential victim of being separated from his money. Probably they also think that the fairy tale, leprechaums and Santa Claus exist.
Steven
NickFerrar
MIS
Well I work for a global outsourcer (that's also rapidly developing it's Indian off-shore capabilities). Companies don't really look to outsource purely to save money, they want the distraction of IT taken away from the business (although of course quality and cost savings are usually major goals to...).
Unfortunately I know many people that have lost their jobs due to outsourcing, typically they are kept on for a few months so the transition is seamless and then the cost savings start, it's not rocket science to work out one of the main ways of cutting fixed costs is to reduce headcount.
I think off-shoring IT is a little short-sighted though, already Bangalore's infrastructure is at breaking point and salaries are rising fast over there to. Eastern Europe is now the next 'big thing'. I'm sure it will come full circle in the end though, it won't take many high-profile disasters due to poor infrastructure or local laws not protecting the companies etc along with rising salaries before CEO's get nervous.
Unfortunately I know many people that have lost their jobs due to outsourcing, typically they are kept on for a few months so the transition is seamless and then the cost savings start, it's not rocket science to work out one of the main ways of cutting fixed costs is to reduce headcount.
I think off-shoring IT is a little short-sighted though, already Bangalore's infrastructure is at breaking point and salaries are rising fast over there to. Eastern Europe is now the next 'big thing'. I'm sure it will come full circle in the end though, it won't take many high-profile disasters due to poor infrastructure or local laws not protecting the companies etc along with rising salaries before CEO's get nervous.
- Status