Analysts: Outsourcing costs more than in-house services

April 23, 2007, 09:17 AM —  Computerworld UK — 

Compass Management Consulting also warned that two thirds of outsourcing contracts worth more than £20 million ($40 million) were "unravelling" before the end of their contract terms.

The research, based on an analysis of 240 deals worth more than £20 million, found that outsourcing providers were pricing contracts to produce savings of up 18 percent compared with in-house costs in the first year.

But costs then began to escalate, reaching 36 percent above comparable top quartile internal operations by year three.

Top-tier outsourcing providers were charging an average of 30 percent -- and sometimes as high as 45 percent -- above in-house costs in the final years of the contract.

The providers' need to cover bidding costs, generate profits and cover risks and corporate overheads were raising contract prices, typically by 20 percent more than a well-performing in-house operation, Compass said.

Simon Scarrott, head of business development and marketing at Compass, said: "With those figures, it is easy to see why the claim that all outsourcing will save money is a myth. There can be sound strategic reasons for outsourcing but saving money over the long term is not one of them."

He added: "Outsourcing providers are not that different from an in-house operation. Indeed, they often use the same people as the in-house operation after the deal is signed and outsourcers cannot perform alchemy on a business process and turn an operation into gold."

He added that businesses were also losing out because of the high level of failure of outsourcing deals. "We are seeing up to 65 percent of all outsourcing contracts worth over £20 million unravelling before running their full term," he said.

"The costs to both parties of this level of failure are high and the legal and advisory costs can quickly escalate."

But the biggest impact of outsourcing failure comes when it "becomes a business problem and constrains strategic freedom for the future as well as the negative effect on current operations," Scarrott said.

» posted by abennett

Computerworld UK

Sign up for ITworld's Daily newsletter
Follow ITworld on Twitter @IT_world

I like it!
Post a comment
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
peer-to-peer

Brian Proffitt
Microsoft/Novell: Breaking Down the Coupon Numbers

Esther Schindler
Drupal's Dries Buytaert on Building the Next Drupal

Tom Henderson
Top Ten General Operating Systems Rants

pasmith
PS3 motion controller delayed; goes up against Project Natal

sjvn
Neolithic Windows security hole alive and well in Windows 7

claird
Perl source code comparison makes for good reading

mikelgan
Cell phones don't create stress or interrupt much

Sandra Henry-Stocker
How to: The Unix Interview

 

Where Google Chrome security fails: the password
I heard mention that the Chrome OS will have some sort of encryption available a la bitlocker. If it's possible to encrypt personal data using another password or key, then it may have potential for very secure data.... And Ubuntu has an 'encrypt home directory' option, perhaps google should follow suit.
- Dann

Join the conversation here

The Daily Tip

The Daily TipQuick, practical advice for IT pros. Made fresh daily.

Hot tips:

Want to cash in on your IT savvy? Send your tip to tips@itworld.com. If we post it, we'll send you a $25 Amazon e-gift card.

Newsletters

Subscribe to ITWORLD TODAY and receive the latest IT news and analysis.

I would like to receive offers via email from ITworld partners.
By clicking submit you agree to the terms and conditions outlined in ITworld's privacy policy.
Marketplace