All Posts in Career Management

|In: Career Management|Last Updated:

Argument by assertion seems to be on the increase.

Following my recent series on outsourcing, which argued against the popular non-core-competency theory (exercise core competencies in-house and outsource everything else), I received quite a few letters presenting the counterargument that you should outsource non-core competencies. Why? Because they aren’t your core competencies, that’s why!

It’s hard to come to grips with logic like that, let alone argue against it. But I’ll give it one more try. The more I try to figure out what “core competency” means, the more murky the whole thing becomes. I’m left with four outsourcing drivers – two positive, two negative:

  • Outsource when the outsourcer can provide the equivalent function for lower cost (or just fire the manager who can’t deliver the function without margins at the same price an outsourcer can deliver it with margins).
  • Outsource when the function being outsourced requires scarce high-value talent (for example, ad agencies).
  • Avoid outsourcing when the cost of changing your mind, also known as the switching cost, is high, as it is with IT.
  • Don’t outsource if your real goal is solving a personnel problem. If you’ve accumulated an inventory of unproductive employees over the years and are really outsourcing the unpleasant task of terminating them, there are far less drastic ways of handling this chore than outsourcing the function.

Nothing is quite this simple, of course, but I can at least understand these four decision factors. Why you’d want to increase the cost or risk of a function because it isn’t a “core competency” — a term whose definition is murky at best — continues to baffle me.

Not only that, but outsourcing doesn’t always solve the problem. Curt Sahakian of the Corporate Partnering Institute (www.corporate-partnering.com), which helps companies create partnership and outsourcing agreements, says many outsourcing deals are structured so badly it’s like drinking seawater when you’re adrift at sea. It isn’t a sustainable solution, and you end up thirstier than when you started.

Sahakian also offers this advice: Since your employers are going to buy their saltwater from someone, why not you? If outsourcing is inevitable, take charge of the situation and suggest a restructuring that turns your existing IT organization into an outsourcing provider, either as an independent or as a joint venture with one of the major outsourcing vendors.

When your choice is whether to be dinner or chef, chef is probably better.

Comments

|In: Career Management|Last Updated:

Wanted: Brilliant physicist, to lead the Perpetual Motion Institute (PMI).

It’s a Catch-22. In Joseph Heller’s brilliant novel this badly misused metaphor was a combat exemption clause. To get it, you simply had to apply for it. Unfortunately, the act of applying for Catch-22 automatically disqualified you from receiving it. This would also be the case for anyone applying for PMI’s leadership position.

Here’s a Catch-22-enabled leadership position that really exists:

Senior Executive Program Manager: We are seeking a Senior Executive Program Manager (SEPM) to spearhead an enterprise-wide, cross-jurisdictional systems integration project using contemporary web and message-oriented middleware solutions to share comprehensive data among divisions organization-wide.

The SEPM, an enthusiastic visionary leader/change agent, will engender support for enterprise-wide, multi-jurisdictional organizational change and establish/manage a cross-functional team implementing numerous technology projects which encompass all levels of the organization.

Program History: This program was originally chartered to address the needs of a single business unit, but quickly evolved into a model for integration throughout the enterprise. It involves an enterprise-wide framework of people, processes, standards, and technology focused on achieving business goals and objectives. This framework involves significant investments in business process re-engineering and technology, requires the implementation of data and technology standards and accountabilities that apply across the board, and necessitates the development of cross-functional, highly interdependent governance structures.

Requirements: The successful candidate must have excellent communication, presentation and facilitation skills, and be able to communicate information convincingly to different audiences to build a strong coalition among stakeholders and end-users.

Benefits/Salary: Nowhere near enough.

* * *

What’s wrong with this position? The problems are merely insurmountable, that’s all. An enterprise-wide business change program with no enterprise-wide sponsorship is hopeless. There’s no highly placed, committed executive to arm-twist reluctant business-unit heads into providing the cooperation needed for success, nor is there the groundswell of end-user enthusiasm that can sometimes overpower even the most obstructionist executives.

There’s only a champion — someone who saw potential in a small, achievable project, inflated it to enterprise proportions, but failed to understand the prerequisites of enterprise-wide change.

So there can’t be a highly qualified program manager to lead the charge. Why?

It’s Catch-22: Applying for this job automatically disqualifies the applicant.

Comments