In its campaign against the UK's continued membership of the European Union, 'Vote Leave' claimed that EU procurement rules, which govern the purchase of goods and services by public sector bodies, cost UK taxpayers £1.6bn a year. It also claimed that 1.9 million days a year are lost to red tape delays.
Is it likely or possible that the UK can save this money and time cost by changing the public procurement rules after Brexit?
A couple of months back, we published our Top Ten Outsourcing Acronyms – a piece that had been a long time brewing, after we’d initially put out a call for entries the previous year. Well, as seems frequently to be the case with this series, that publication prompted a flood of new submissions, and we’re delighted to be able now to unveil a hilarious – if somewhat potty-mouthed – sequel.
A couple of years back, I approached a number of legal process outsourcing (LPO) firms - all of the largest and most reputable American and British ones. Many replied; only one expressed interest and took it further. I made a proposal to establish a centre in Beirut, Lebanon, and was hoping it would go further - but it didn’t.
But what if it had? What would have happened?
With the United Kingdom set to leave the European Union, the impact on the Polish outsourcing market looks likely to be both positive and negative. The full extent on outsourcing is yet to be determined, but some predictions can be made based on various scenarios.
If Polish talent leaves the UK
Europe is in turmoil after Great Britain’s vote to leave the European Union. Those who now claim to know what will happen now – in outsourcing or in other areas – will make two big mistakes: First, they will show that they don’t understand what Brexit is. Brexit is, to use the words of author Nassim Nicholas Taleb, a “black swan”: an unexpected event with largely unforeseeable consequences, just like 9/11 or the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy filing. Second, they will simply be wrong.
Nearly two weeks after the UK’s vote to leave the European Union (the ‘Brexit’), very little has become clear in terms of what this means for the country and the EU itself – and the sourcing and outsourcing space in the region - and even how and when the exit process will take place. Obviously, such a momentous transition should not be rushed through over-hastily; however, uncertainty can have a paralysing economic and commercial impact and pressure is already mounting on the British government to begin the formal exit process.
Offshore outsourcing is controversial. No news there. For over 15 years customers have been moving services offshore as part of their global souring strategy. In the early ’00s businesses couldn’t offshore quick enough. Opponents of offshoring frequently quote the loss of domestic jobs, damage to economies, poor communication and quality, while proponents insist it facilitates competition and actually makes economies more efficient. But amid the furore, there is a rise in organisations returning from offshore.
The UK’s Modern Slavery Act 2015 (the MSA) now means that businesses’ supply chains need to be safer, more transparent, and more ethical. While it’s hard to argue that any of this is a bad thing, the development has left a few businesses in something of a panic.
Of all the jargon and buzzwords beloved of IT professionals – “the cloud”, “SaaS”, “web 2.0” and an infinity of others – “Big Data” is the most alluringly easy to misunderstand. Whilst big data systems do entail a large volume of data, the real benefits come from the speed (or ‘velocity’) of accumulation, and the array of different types of data (or ‘variety’) that are collected and analysed.
A major focus of this series is on how academics and economists have transformed modern thinking about the nature of the business and outsourcing contract, from its relationship to the firm and how it is used and governed to its relationship on pricing and total cost.