There are several misconceptions and myths about outsourcing software requirements that an organization should know. It is good to address these in a concise, clear manner to avoid confusion by the disinformation and misinformation about this issue.
Technology is a huge arena and there are several considerations to take before a business organization or any other company for that matter should be aware of before proceeding to the endeavor.
The following are the five myths about software outsourcing.
1. Quality of work could only be done in-house. Although having a full team of software developers in-house is the standard approach for most firms, often it is impractical and unachievable. It does not guarantee quality of work. Most organizations find work quality when they hire an offshore or outsourcing service provider. High quality should be expected of any vendor relationship and it could surely be delivered in an offshore setting.
2. It is not just about cost savings. The most obvious benefit of the process is the cost cutting factor. Nonetheless, choosing the least expensive provider could often backfire and could end up costing so much more. Choosing the most affordable provider simply means choosing a firm with very little leeway in its profit margins. Successful vendors may be better bets even if they are most costly.
3. The time zone is a huge obstacle. While this could be true for countries with little or even no overlap with US time zones, the issue in general could be easily dealt with. For instance, US firms could contract with providers closer to its geography. Meetings may be scheduled during the first part of the day. Developing software involves more individualized work that could be handled during non-overlapping hours. Thus, the time zone difference does not pose any problem at all.
4. Offshoring is very risky. This is a common fear that deeply lies in the minds of business organizations. Although the overall fear level has plummeted in the globalization era, the fear continues to linger for many. The reality is that with a few exceptions, offshore relationships do not come with any bigger risk than working with any provider, including domestic service providers. The fact that a lot of offshore vendors have achieved formidable track records for successful engagements proves the point sufficiently.
5. Managing remote workers is too hard. This may have a point, but if a company offshores with the right vendor, the burden of management could be eliminated. If the vendor provides full management oversight of their staff, including full working hours accountability, the hurdles of remote management are circumvented effectively. The best solution would be to have a cohesive team that is being managed closely, both in the overall progress and day-to-day tasks.
Excellent offshore providers operate within the healthy boundaries of industry standards with quality certifications such as ISO 9001. There are many reputable providers and some have decades of experience in delivering outstanding solutions to their clientele. Some even provide consultations and service estimates for free, so there are no risks or hindrances to determine if an organization can benefit from the relationship.
Technology is a huge arena and there are several considerations to take before a business organization or any other company for that matter should be aware of before proceeding to the endeavor.
The following are the five myths about software outsourcing.
1. Quality of work could only be done in-house. Although having a full team of software developers in-house is the standard approach for most firms, often it is impractical and unachievable. It does not guarantee quality of work. Most organizations find work quality when they hire an offshore or outsourcing service provider. High quality should be expected of any vendor relationship and it could surely be delivered in an offshore setting.
2. It is not just about cost savings. The most obvious benefit of the process is the cost cutting factor. Nonetheless, choosing the least expensive provider could often backfire and could end up costing so much more. Choosing the most affordable provider simply means choosing a firm with very little leeway in its profit margins. Successful vendors may be better bets even if they are most costly.
3. The time zone is a huge obstacle. While this could be true for countries with little or even no overlap with US time zones, the issue in general could be easily dealt with. For instance, US firms could contract with providers closer to its geography. Meetings may be scheduled during the first part of the day. Developing software involves more individualized work that could be handled during non-overlapping hours. Thus, the time zone difference does not pose any problem at all.
4. Offshoring is very risky. This is a common fear that deeply lies in the minds of business organizations. Although the overall fear level has plummeted in the globalization era, the fear continues to linger for many. The reality is that with a few exceptions, offshore relationships do not come with any bigger risk than working with any provider, including domestic service providers. The fact that a lot of offshore vendors have achieved formidable track records for successful engagements proves the point sufficiently.
5. Managing remote workers is too hard. This may have a point, but if a company offshores with the right vendor, the burden of management could be eliminated. If the vendor provides full management oversight of their staff, including full working hours accountability, the hurdles of remote management are circumvented effectively. The best solution would be to have a cohesive team that is being managed closely, both in the overall progress and day-to-day tasks.
Excellent offshore providers operate within the healthy boundaries of industry standards with quality certifications such as ISO 9001. There are many reputable providers and some have decades of experience in delivering outstanding solutions to their clientele. Some even provide consultations and service estimates for free, so there are no risks or hindrances to determine if an organization can benefit from the relationship.