UK outsourcing market hits record levels The total annual value of outsourcing contracts agreed in the UK in the first three months of 2017 hit record levels, according to new figures. In its latest quarterly outsourcing index, Information Services Group (ISG) reported that outsourcing contracts worth €1.4 billion in total a year were awarded in the first quarter of …
"This all turns to shit"
It already has - for anyone trying to use the outsourced "disservices". Probably for anyone working for these shysters as well.
I guess your hope is that, for a change, it turns to shit (deep, pungent, clinging shit with lumps) for the shareholders, directors, and the corrupt sods in Government who keep on shovelling cash at these fraudsters.
It is not (just) about the ability of local gov to pass the buck when things go tits up, put simply, many companies do not have the skills or headcount to perform internal projects any more.
Up till now they have not really bothered to invest in their staff, preferring to take on someone already skilled to do a specific piece of work rather than train up a number of people to do the job for themselves.
I have worked in a number of companies on multiple occasions doing what is pretty simple stuff on more than one occasion for the same company.
Had they bothered to treat their own internal IT as less of a cost and more of a resource to be looked after, then they would never had to have gone to the expense of getting in contractors every few months.
Local government however, will never stop outsourcing. Its all about the blame game for them, projects are started with no real belief that they will succeed because the ACT of starting a project shows they are fulfilling their obligations, success is not required
You could say the same for any department which is generally not "front of house" such as information security, information governance, cleaning, estates/facilities management, HR, occupational health etc.
They are all being outsourced where possible to "save money" but in reality I doubt any money at all is saved and the service is usually poorer and less flexible as a result.
Aside from big cities like London, governments that don't have enough work to justify more than a small full time IT team would be nuts to keep it in house. Maybe you get lucky and hire smart people who stick around for decades, keep up on the latest tech, and do a much better job for you than any outsourcer could. But the reality is that you are more likely to get short timers who will hop to a new job the minute more pay is dangled, stick around forever and insist that "token ring is still fine, not need to follow that ethernet fad" either due to laziness or job security, or are just plain crappy at their job.
It is a service that should be outsourced like any other non core competency. Local governments don't own their own road building equipment and employ people to operate it. They contract that stuff out because they aren't the experts at it and don't do enough of it to justify doing it in-house.
Now large governments like say the UK and US could effectively insource their own outsourcing. That is, basically replicate the structure of an outsourcing company with government employees, so resources can be shared rather than having each organization having their own IT fiefdom. Whether the result would be any better than outsourcing to IBM or whoever, your guess is as good as mine.
Your head office (elsewhere in the EU, and this is nothing to do with Brexit) decides to expand its IT department and remotely provide all services to its branches in the UK, losing all the UK IT staff.
Impossible to provide figures for but I wonder how much this goes on
"Traditional sourcing ACV (annual contract value) for France paints a less positive picture," ISG said. "The €70 million awarded in the first quarter was the country's weakest performance in five years."
A "less positive" picture? A "weak" performance?
That's assuming that outsourcing is a _good_ thing. Which of course it is, for Information Services Group. Hardly an impartial view.
..... it's not easy.
Each time the likes of DXC (the bastard child of CSC and HPE) expand their customer base that's a massive overhead in terms of senior ITO managers having to go to visit extra disgruntled customers each subsequent quarter as news of the next mass layoff round starts to get out.
It can't be easy assuring a customer that you really care and that their service is your priority before rushing off to ensure you have the absolute minimum headcount, probably robbed from another account that complains less, to keep your SLAs bubbling away just the right shade of red to get away with just too few failures and penalties to provoke a termination.
Companies that cede their futures and control to these charlatans instead of investing in their staff get what they deserve.
Being made redundant because of some Indian outfit that promises the earth but obviously can't deliver.
so they try to hie the people just made redundant but on Indian rates.
Then they wonder why those newly redunstant people give them the finger big time.
The outsouced service goes to pot, the customer who outsourced the stuff in the first place loses contracts because the service is now crap and before there were people who actually cared about delivery.
Then the whole thing starts again because the company at the centre of this isn't making enough profit.
Like Alitalia they'll go bust.
I'm luck, I got out before all the above started. The Indian company still wants me to do some work but at Indian rates. How many times do I have to say no before they get the message.
Plonkers.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
