Background (General Facts from Case Study)

Dell is a computer corporation recognized for manufacturing computer systems through parts assemble. In 1983, Michael Dell saw an opportunity in using IBM compatible computers for a new assembly line that can be sold to local businesses. The idea as explained by Michael Dell, in an interview with Joan Magretta[1], is that in the early days of computers’ manufacturing, companies had to be able to produce every part of the system. As the industry matured, companies started to focus on single parts and to become specialized in creating items that can be assembled with other parts to prepare a computer. As a result, Dell understood that to have a competitive edge in the market, they needed to focus on activities that drive sales instead of putting capital in producing items that other manufactures are already creating.

In the 1990’s, the computer market revolved around desktops, notebooks, and network servers. Dell competed with high-end machines from IBM, HP, and Compaq with a product line that provided value-priced systems for consumers and highly reliable networked systems for business. In the late 90’s, around 40% of households owned a pc in the US. On the contrary, from the business side, around 80% of the companies still had old server and desktop machines. Management had to approve purchasing orders, which resulted in only 2.2% of servers’ sale in comparison to the total purchases for desktop PCs in 1996.

In order for Dell to achieve $7.8 billion from sales in the late 90’s, it had to skip over the traditional channels of using retail or value-added resellers (VARs) to sell directly to the consumers . The “direct-model “or as Michael Dell comments on how his new employees call it “The model” is not that all powerful system. It is simply a way for Dell to cut on the standard supply chain cycle and deliver goods directly from the manufacturer to the customer. They created partnerships with several suppliers such as Sony, Intel, and others to deliver goods effectively at the time of the order to Dell’s plant where the assembly took place. The delivery and shipment were outsourced through a dedicated service that also insured delivering the monitors directly from the supplier at the same time. Mr. Dell talks about how suppliers are benefiting from the fact that Dell buys more items from the suppliers keeping no inventory and only requesting faster delivery upon orders.

In 1996, Dell capitalized on the growing number of customers who are using the Internet and launched its online store at dell.com. The online venture then proved to be the most appropriate sales channel that matched the supply chain direct model implemented by Dell.

In its path to compete in the market, Dell had to provide additional services such as DellPlus that enabled Dell to install commercial software packages, DellWare which provided hardware and software from other vendors, and after sales and on-site support services. These actions, as described by Michael Dell, required establishing more partnerships, which Mr. Dell describes as a process of “trial and error”. The integration with partners was changing as the technology is evolving and many venders go volatile while others remain sold. Furthermore, looking for an IT company to build the online store brought in very few players, which made Dell accept the overhead of developing the portal in-house.

Enterprise Architecture Issues

Supply Chain Management: The purchase and number of transactions that Dell took in required a properly configured and concise business process.
In-sourcing: To meet the demand of the market some parts of the process required the services of other companies that can be in partner with Dell.
Quality Assurance: The computer industry is a very dynamic one, which makes quality products stand out when faced with technology-oriented consumers.
Business Automation: As Dell advanced into online markets, its sales staff feared from losing their jobs in favor of automated sales transactions.
Dynamic Industry: The technology industry requires closely monitoring consumers’ trend to maintain a low gap between the point of demand and the point of supply.

Analysis

Supply Chain Management

Supply Chain Management (SCM) aims at integrating all corporate activities to improve relationships at all levels (internal operations, supplier networks, and distribution channel) to meet the competitive edge and satisfy the customer (Al-Mashari and Zairi 2000)[2]. In order to build an effective and complete business process that supports SCM, information among all business partners need to be shared. Information sharing through the Internet reduce the gap for business-to-business (B2B) commerce by enabling seamless integration with enterprise processes among partner corporations (Archer 2006)[3].

Dell developed its internal business process by creating production cells that start assembly at the point of order. It also established an internal information system to make the details of the products under production electronically available to all parties within the chain. To manage the supply of computer parts, Dell maintained close relationships with their suppliers and logistics providers to make their vendors manage the inventory system while Dell focused on product assembly (Kumar and Craig 2007)[4]. In addition, Dell used enterprise technology to make their database and methodologies available to the supplier to understand how Dell works. On the consumer side, orders made through the phone or online through dell.com produced a tracking code that the consumer can use to track the status of his or her order at any time through the phone or on Dell’s website.

In sourcing

Organizations worldwide are benefiting from the specialized services offered by various companies. In the shipping and transport arena, companies Like UPS (United Parcel Service) and DHL stand out as masters in their industry. UPS and DHL have established offices and transportation vehicles all across the world. They provide business services through in-sourcing which enables them to be part of the internal business process of companies (Marcum 2007)[5]. To a company like Toshiba for example, after-sales support service would require shipping the damaged computer to and from the consumer’s side. For that, UPS would say, “Look, instead of us picking up the machine from your customers, bringing it to our hub, then flying it from our hub to your repair facility and then flying it back to our hub and then from our hub to your customer’s house, let’s cut out all the middle steps. We, UPS, will pick it up, repair it, and send it right to your customer” (Friedman 2006)[6].

Dell understands that it need not compete unless it would get the advantage in the market. Michael Dell says that one should evaluate the competition field and pick the best one. In that context, after-sales services were contracted with firms who are specialized in that field and can be contacted directly through the integrated supply system to fulfill the requests of the consumers. Furthermore, shipping is handled through multiple shippers to deliver systems to consumers or to resellers across the world. In addition, Dell has saved the overhead cost of monitors’ delivery by requesting shippers to deliver from the monitor’s supplier directly to the consumer at the same time.

Quality Assurance

In a competitive arena, companies seek to have an advantage through means that are not necessarily related to price. Constraints against outsourcing due to excessive decentralization within organizations can have a negative impact on the value chain process. Combing various options and being open to diversification would support in increasing the speed-to-market and enhancing the quality of products (Ernst 2000)[7].

Dell has an operational facility in Penang Malaysia, which places Dell at a central position near to where most suppliers actually have their factories. Orders for goods come directly to Penang center through the integrated suppliers’ logistic centers (SLCs) chain[8]. The Penang center sends emails to suppliers requesting the parts that will be assembled based on the customer’s order. The entire model was efficient enough to require no more than 36 hours from order to shipping. In terms of quality of service, Dell has won numerous awards for highest quality. In spite of that, it continues to find means to increase the efficiency of its products. Michael Dell suggested that reducing the human interaction with hard drives during assembly would decrease its failure rate. As a result, the reduction of the number of “touches” dropped the failure rate to 20%.

Business Automation

The general attitude from individuals and employees within organizations is that automation through information systems complicate their internal processes, and might result in cutting down the number of staff (Khatibi, V.Thyagarajan and Seetharaman 2003)[9]. There are several psychological and behavioral problems associated with reluctance to change, which appear to impede the growth of E-commerce. On the other hand, retailers no longer think their web sites are simply an added benefit for their customers since the ROI (Return on Investment) percentages from online websites have far outweighed their bricks-and-mortar counterparts (Casey 2004)[10]. For that reason, the staff involved in the traditional sales process requires training to embrace new technologies and to learn how they can benefit from it.

For Dell online store the response from the consumers was huge, however, at first the sales representatives feared that the online website would reduce the number of sale deals they closed. To overcome this, Dell introduced the cost saving model showing how the online store would support sales representative close more deals and at the same time would produce cost effective results that would have a positive ROI on the business.

Dynamic Industry

Customer relations management (CRM) is a very vital competency that was born from the amount of transactional sales deals through call centers. The process of understanding customers goes through the initial phase of collecting data then analyzing trends and eventually building a knowledge base that will drive the profitable relationship (Liew 2008)[11]. Organizations’ use of CRM models is an attempt to get firsthand knowledge that would improve marketing effectiveness, bring more personalization, and build brands among other objectives based on the nature of the business (Anderson, Jolly and Fairhurst 2007)[12].

Michael Dell model is based on keeping no inventory, in order for Dell to maintain that they focused on segmenting their customers into scalable businesses that can be analyzed for their level of demand. Sales executives at Dell used communication skills to elicit information from customers that would further support the demand forecast initiatives at the company. In addition, Dell sent surveys to customers to further understand the satisfaction level with the services provided by Dell and modify its product line and services accordingly. Furthermore, Michael Dell discussed how regional meetings in various countries invited potential customers to further enrich the relationship and give room for comments and feedback about Dell’s services. On top of all that, Dell strived to provide information for its customers to help them make proper choices for their IT requirements and gain privileged information about new and upcoming technologies. Dell invested in developing a web portal in the form of “Premier Pages” for high-end customers and another for small to medium businesses at Dellmarketplace.com[13]. Both sites aim at providing information to customers and establishing a single point of access for customers’ IT service requirements.

Conclusions

Dell is simply a success story; it shows how one can gain market advantage by simply understanding what brings value to customers. No one, even Michael Dell himself when he started, thought that people would enjoy customizing their PC orders and wait patiently as the order makes its way back to their homes. Some studies talk about how people challenged the initial delivery estimates provided by Dell to see if they were met.

The level of expansion Dell strived to achieve brought in problems as with any growing business. However, by adapting techniques such as In-sourcing and mutual benefit partnerships it reduced its potential staff from 80,000 to only 15,000. Dell also was aware of factors that would hinder its supply chain. For example, they maintained a multiple list of shippers as not to be affected by unexpected delays and organizational issues. In addition, they understood the importance of developing their own enterprise systems in-house to control all the variables and maintain their business processes.

This is one of the best case studies in the IT industry. I believe the level of commitment Dell showed in the model he created is inspiring. On the editorial side, I believe more highlights on the internal infrastructure of Dell’s network would have helped in building an understanding of how the supply chain actually worked. Did they use CRM modules, ERP, SCM, or a combination of all? How did Dell secure its information link with its suppliers, were all of them mature enough when it came to Information systems?

Recommendations

Organizations should focus on value adding activities like establishing online portals for their customers.
Businesses should conduct frequent surveys to measure the level of service they provide and work on enhancing their products.
Organizations should decentralize and enable expansion through global techniques such as out-sourcing and in-sourcing.
Building internal enterprise information systems is the most effective methodology for information and knowledge sharing.
Establishing multiple touch points with customers, strengthen the relationship and increases satisfaction levels.
Meeting global quality standards is the only way to get an advantage in a competitive arena.
Internal organization assessment and training is vital to maintain the high spirit of employees and increase their productivity.
Management support and funding is a key element in the success of any information system implementation.

References

Joan Magretta , “The Power of Virtual Integration: An Interview with Dell Computer’s Michael Dell.” Harvard Business Review 76, no. 2 (Mar/Apr 1998): 72-84, 13, 2.
Majed Al-Mashari and Mohamed Zairi, “Supply-chain re-engineering using enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems: an analysis of a SAP R/3 implementation case.” International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 30, no. 3/4 (2000): 296-313
Norman P. Archer, “Supply chains and the enterprise” Journal of Enterprise Information 19, no. 3 (2006): 241-245, 242
Sameer Kumar and Sarah Craig, “Dell, Inc.’s closed loop supply chain for computer assembly plants.” Information Knowledge Systems Management 6, no. 3 (2007): 197-214,18.
Marcum, Jennifer. “In-Source or Outsource?” BioProcess International, June 2007
Thomas L. Friedman, The World Is Flat (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2006), 168.
Dieter Ernst, “Inter-Organizational Knowledge Outsourcing: What Permits Small Taiwanese Firms to Compete in the Computer Industry?” Asia Pacific Journal of Management (Springer Netherlands) 17, no. 2 (August 2000): 223-255, 248
Friedman, The World is Flat, 516
Ali Khatibi, V.Thyagarajan, and A. Seetharaman, “E-commerce in Malaysia: Perceived Benefits and Barriers.” Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers 28, no. 3 (Jul-Sep 2003): 77-82, 6.
Bernadette Casey, “Online Monday blacker than in-store Friday.” DSN Retailing Today, December 13, 2004: 13-13,0.
Chor-Beng Anthony Liew, “Strategic integration of knowledge management and customer relationship management.” Journal of Knowledge Management 12, no. 4 (2008): 131-146.
Anderson, Joan L., Laura D. Jolly, and Ann E. Fairhurst. “Customer relationship management in retailing: A content analysis of retail trade journals.” Journal of Retailing & Consumer Services 14, no. 6 (November 2007): 394-399, 6.
Alorie Gilbert, “Dell Online Marketplace Targets Small Businesses.” Electronic Buyers’ News, October 2, 2000: 58, 0.

Harness Digital Photo Frame Uk

January 25th, 2012 by InfoMan | Comments Off

Introduction

In the year, prior to the turn of the millennium, Nissan was a company in a serious financial crisis. Debt had approached $22 billion by 1999. The company had been too complacent, and had taken its prior success, for granted [2].

Did Nissan’s decision to outsource their IT Infrastructure to IBM in 1999 make good sense? Nissan was a very troubled auto-manufacturer in the late 1990’s. Senior executives from the company were known for their conservative outlook on business, and their ‘old boy’s network,’ mentality. Profits were dropping dramatically, eventually forcing the company into the $22 Billion debt that it then faced. There were no signs indicating a change in the market that would encourage profit growth. The vehicle sales needed invigoration.

Mergers were the flavor of the day in the automotive industry during the late 1990’s. Nissan executives approached Daimler Chrysler and Ford to discuss a possible merger, but there was no interest from either of the companies [2]. There was only one alternative left, which was to reinvent themselves and reduce unnecessary overheads. This was the defining point that led to the business process outsourcing decision.

This paper seeks to answer the question “Does the cost of implementing an in-house solution outweigh the benefits or does Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) make more sense?” We reviewed the example of the automotive manufacturer, Nissan, when they decided to outsource their entire Information Technology department to IBM in late 1999, to answer our question.

Nissan – A brief history and the events leading up to the BPO decision

I. The Boom years

Nissan was established in Japan in 1933 as a heavy industry manufacturer. After the Second World War they turned their attention to automotive vehicles. In the 1950’s, they finally had an impact on the global market with the introduction of the Datsun branded sedans and small pickup trucks. The company eventually opened full-time operations in the USA in September 1960 [6].

The company experienced dramatic growth with the introduction of the ‘Z’ series sports sedans in the early 1970’s, with the 240Z becoming the fastest selling sports car of all time. This success led Nissan to the top of the U.S. vehicle importers market by 1975. Vehicle sales in the USA topped over 250,000 units per annum by 1970 [6]. The company was young, its leaders dynamic and the future looked very bright. They were competing for the U.S. market with the likes of Ford, Chrysler, and General Motors, showing improved quality and production efficiencies over their competitors.

The company was growing at a phenomenal rate, opening new manufacturing plants around the world on a regular basis such as Australia (1976), Spain (1980) and the United Kingdom (1984) [6]. There was no respite to the pace of growth and new business generation coming from the company.

In 1983, the company began the worldwide marketing of vehicles under the Nissan name which was felt to have a stronger quality image and started the six year transition from Datsun to Nissan on vehicles, dealerships, facilities and marketing materials. Sales continued to grow, eventually reaching 830,767 in 1985 [6]. The decade closed out with resounding success for Nissan with their domination of the North American market.

In 1993, the mid-line Stanza sedan was replaced with an all-new Altima and non-competitive Japanese-designed minivan was replaced with a new U.S. created Quest, which was the first minivan with car-like handling. Sales came roaring back in 1994 to near-peak levels of 774,405 [6].

In 1996, sales began to slip once again, fueled by a change in American vehicle tastes. Trucks and SUVs gained market share at the expense of sedans and sports cars [2]. Nissan’s position as a manufacturing driven company, which helped them in the ’80’s and early ’90’s, then had new problems with the dollar/yen balance which began to hurt their competitiveness against market driven companies.

Unlike their competitors, Toyota and Honda, which were focused on key volume segments, Nissan did not dominate any individual segment and competed in identical segments against Toyota and Honda.

Unfortunately for Nissan in the 1990s, the Japanese “bubble economy” burst, a downturn in Europe coincided, so there was more pressure in the U.S. to perform. Unfortunately U.S. customers didn’t have a genuine brand reason to shop Nissan except for the ‘best price’ deal.

Former Nissan president, Mr. Nakamura, announced a “Back-to-Basics” plan. The key elements of the plan were to reduce inventories, eliminate unrealistic sales targets, and increase dealer profitability. Unfortunately for Nakamura and Nissan, the plan did not work [2].

II. Trouble looms for the auto-manufacturer in 1990’s

In the early 1990’s, trouble began to brew in the organization. The once revered executives at Nissan were now viewed as arrogant members of the old-boys club and were ignorant to the changing needs of their customers and the overall automotive market, in general.

As the company progressed deeper into debt, it met with more challenges. Nissan’s business partners and suppliers were charging a premium for their goods and services. Nissan was obliged to meet its financial commitments and by so doing placed itself further into debt. Finally, the company was in debt to the tune of $22 billion. Even the company’s financers were tightening the noose around them. Nissan felt the situation was hopeless.

III. Steps taken to address issues

Nissan executives were looking for a way out, a way to rescue the company from entering into bankruptcy. The first approach was to find a partner. Both the newly established DaimlerChrysler and the Ford Motor company were approached, but both organizations rejected the idea of a merger [2]. Finally, Renault, the French automotive company recovering from a similar predicament, decided to enter into negotiations with the flailing Japanese company. A senior executive at Renault, Carlos Ghosn, was a huge supporter of the merger idea.

After much negotiation, the Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry agreed to allow Renault to purchase a substantial stake in Nissan. The Nissan-Renault alliance was born and Ghosn was appointed Chief Operating Officer.

Nissans Executive decisions and major events

I. Creating a global alliance vision:

The following is excerpted from the Nissan/Renault alliance vision:

“The Renault-Nissan Alliance is a unique group of two global companies linked by cross-shareholding. They are united for performance though a coherent strategy, common goals, and principles, results-driven synergies, shared best practices. They respect and reinforce their respective identities and brands.”[2]

The Alliance set itself three objectives, with the goal of being amongst the best three automotive groups in the following areas:

1. Quality.

Achieve customer recognition as being a quality and value added product.

2. Technology.

Lead in key technology development and implementation with a focus on excellence in specific areas of the automotive business.

3. Operating Profit.

Consistently generate a high operating profit margin and vigorously pursue growth.

II. Appointing a new leader

Ghosn, given his enthusiasm for the merger, his demonstrated tenacity, and his experience of the automotive industry, was a natural choice for a senior position at Nissan. His initial appointment as Chief Operating Officer (COO) was just a temporary assignment. In 2000, he was named President and in 2001, he was appointed Chief Executive Officer (CEO).

As CEO, Ghosn was very aware that the ‘buck’ stopped with him. He was the final decision maker. Some important and very serious decisions were made to save the ailing company. Ghosn had to use all of his valuable experience gained from rescuing other organizations, such as Michelin and Renault, to save Nissan.

III. Decision making to save a troubled auto-manufacturer

With Ghosn’s arrival in Japan in the spring of 1999, he immediately set about researching Nissan’s root problems. The newly appointed COO had a management philosophy that stated “you must always start with a clean sheet of paper because the worst thing you can have is prefabricated solutions… you have to start with a zero base of thinking, cleaning everything out of your mind.”[2]

For the first few months, Ghosn flew around Japan, meeting and greeting employees at all levels, absorbing information and formulating a plan. He used this information to plot a picture of Nissan from a global perspective, identifying issues, and problems that had created the dispersed, unprofitable organization.

One of the many issues Ghosn identified was the lack of communication around the organization. Seniors managers around the world were aware of some of the issues that caused the downturn of fortune in the company. They even had solutions to them, but had lacked the necessary authority to implement or communicate the solutions back to Corporate Headquarters.

Finally, the major issues were whittled down to five key issues: [2]

• Lack of clear profit orientation. Nissan was not focused on driving profit, but were rather focused on market share and ended up having to buy their market share at the expense of the declining profits.

• Insufficiently focused on customers and too much focus on competitors. The company was too concerned about the competition introducing a new line which would have dug into the Nissan market share. For example when Volkswagen introduced their new Jetta sedan Nissan saw a significant decline in their Maxima sales.

• Lacked cross-functional, cross-border, and intra-hierarchical lines of work in the company. Nissan seemed to operate as separate islands scattered throughout the globe. There was no centralized purchasing function or in fact any of the other major business activities. The organization was not making maximum use of its global presence or buying power.

• Lack of sense of urgency. The executives in Nissan were complacent in their activities. Things had gone so well for the company in the preceding 60 years that they felt that there was no reason to embrace change.

• No shared vision or common long-term plan. Senior management within Nissan did not have a joint plan for the different brands within the company. Each division did their own thing with little or no thought for the greater good of the company. An example was the Z series that had achieved phenomenal success throughout the 1970’s and ’80’s but was suddenly dropped from production when sales dropped. The obvious thing to have been done was to test the market with a modernized design. Instead Nissan chose to ignore the market and drop the brand.

To address the issues, Ghosn announced the Nissan Revival Plan on October 18, 1999. This seven-point plan was aimed at reducing costs and debt as well as creating and launching new automotive brands to raise sales and market awareness. The goals announced in the plan were far-reaching and encompassed: [2]

• The reduction of operating costs, net debt, global head count, and vehicle assembly plants and manufacturing platforms (the latter in Japan).

• The generation of new product investment through the launch of twenty-two new models.

The cost-cutting plan called for centralization of purchasing, procurement, human resources and information technology. By centralizing these essential functions, the plan aimed to assist the company in achieving its aggressive cost reductions.

Expenditure, particularly in the information technology function, was perceived as being out of control. Ghosn’s message to senior level executives was clear, “cut costs in every possible area.” If that meant outsourcing non-core activities because somebody else could do it cheaper, then that had to be fully investigated and determined. The management was ruthless in their execution of the plan [2].

Nissan looks at Business Process Outsourcing as a means

I. Will outsourcing non-core activities save money?

There are well-documented records of company’s saving money and others of outsourcing horror stories. Success really depended on the situation and the provider.

Most experts agreed, though, that you needed to use BPO in strategic decisions, for example refocused efforts on core competencies and not merely for cost cutting activities [1]. Stephen Withers of ZDNet said in his on-line article that you should only “use BPO for strategic purposes, not to take advantage of a (possibly transient) cost saving.” Withers then asked the reader, “Does outsourcing the IT Infrastructure make sense?” To answer that question corporate Chief Information Officer’s (CIO’s) would need to have completed extensive research and have done a thorough analysis of their business processes.

This is exactly what Nissan’s CIO did, or rather what Ghosn told him to do. The company had invested over 80 billion yen (over $US760million) in 1998 on IT services, but their processes were still not providing the management with the infrastructure that would assist in building their competitive edge [5]. The final decision was made to approach various outsourcing service providers for the much needed help.

II. Does outsourcing the IT infrastructure make sense?

If Information Technology (IT) truly was a commodity, like gasoline or electricity, then companies only competed on price, with very small profit margins. In that event, the decision to turn over IT to an outsourcer was as simple as it was a century ago to turn to motor vehicles instead of using the horse and cart. However, while personal computers and the networks they run on may be standardized, the services provided by IT outsourcers vary in many ways. Services such as data analysis, application development, and IT decision-making allowed companies more competitiveness in the market therefore, those elements of IT are far from being viewed as commodities [8].

With regards the decision to outsource, many factors were considered in Nissan’s case. Ann Moynihan in her article in the Albany Business review states “Outsourcing can help you: [3]

• Reduce and control operating costs.

• Free staff to focus on core business.

• Gain access to specialized skills and technologies.

• Introduce positive change.

• Gain control over a difficult-to-manage function resulting from uneven workloads, insufficient or unskilled resources.”

With Nissan, in 1999, this was exactly what they were looking for. Refocused staff efforts, introduction of positive change and control gained in all critical areas led to the outsourcing decision.

The choice of IBM as Nissan’s outsourcing partner was a strategic one. In the late 1990’s there were not many outsourcing companies that had the breadth or the global reach that IBM had. Competitors such as EDS and CSC were not considered because they were only outsourcers and could not offer the hardware and software technology that Nissan required to update their infrastructure [5]. If either one of those competitors were selected over IBM as a partner Nissan would still have faced the same infrastructure issues. IBM was the only logical partner.

Did the relationship work between Nissan & IBM?

I. A further look at the relationship between IBM and Nissan

In a joint IBM and Nissan press release published in Tokyo on June 19, 2000, the two companies announced that they were “Extending their global partnership for information system (IS) operations which Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. and IBM agreed in October 1999, Nissan and IBM today jointly announced that Nissan will outsource its IS operations in Japan, to IBM Japan.

The service includes Nissan’s regular maintenance and operational activities as well as part of its application development, but excludes the planning and design of new systems. The two companies will start operations from October 1. [7]

In North America, Nissan has outsourced these same operations to IBM Corp. since October 1999. This latest agreement in Japan is expected to further accelerate the standardization, integration and centralization of Nissan’s IS on a global level.”

Ghosn further noted, “The Nissan Revival Plan cannot be accomplished without effective information systems. Following upon the recent agreement with Japan Telecom, this latest partnership with IBM puts in place the global infrastructure which is key to support Nissan’s long term profitable growth.” [4]

II. Hypothetical view of the Return-on-Investment model used

Before they could calculate their Return on Investment (ROI), Nissan first had to look at the Total Cost of Ownership model proposed by IBM. Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) is a type of calculation designed to help consumers and enterprise managers assess both direct and indirect costs and benefits related to the purchase of any IT component. The intention was to arrive at a final figure that will reflect the effective cost of purchase, overall [8].

The TCO model used, had to calculate the costs that were required, beyond the fees of outsourcing. The organization had to evaluate specific criteria’s that could have added expense to the outsourcing project. They also had to calculate the ongoing expenses throughout the lifetime of the contract [8].

Then, after calculating the payback period, Nissan were in a position to calculate their ROI. Once the numbers were crunched, a thorough financial and risk analysis was conducted. The ROI measured the profit or cost savings realized. It was calculated by estimating, for a 3-year period, the investment was made and the resulting profit created through that investment.

The results were conclusive. Nissan and IBM entered into their agreement and operations scheduled to commence on October 1, 1999.

Conclusion

I. Did Nissan’s BPO reach its stated objective?

Nissan’s stated objective for the outsourcing of the IT infrastructure was to control expenditure, improve efficiencies, and update the infrastructure. By outsourcing to IBM, Nissan achieved all of its goals.

In controlling expenditure, outsourcing gave companies the opportunity to have a predictable monthly budget for expenditure. That amount may or may not have been lower than current expenditures but the component that was crucial to a large organization such as Nissan was that the amount is predictable. There was no variable component to the pricing. The only time the pricing may have fluctuated was when additional services, which were out of scope of the contract, were required.

In Nissan’s case, that was never a requirement. The company was in the first stage of a major, global, restructuring project and there were no new initiatives taking place.

The second objective in the BPO was to improve efficiencies. IBM is the world’s largest information technology company with revenues close to $100 billion [9]. When companies outsource their operations to IBM they are gaining best-of-breed technologies, excellent consultants and some of the best systems architects money can buy.

The way that any global outsourcer makes its money is by achieving economies of scale. The only way to achieve these economies of scale is to ensure that they deploy the best hardware, software, and infrastructure possible and make that equipment work to maximum efficiencies. By taking full advantage of this best-of-breed technology, Nissan met its second and third stated objectives.

II. What if the IT Infrastructure had been retained in-house?

If Nissan had decided to retain its IT infrastructure in-house and attempted to implement an updated and modernized system, it would have lead to a significant increase in their expenditure. Ghosn’s prime objective, when he took over the company in 1999, was to reduce expenditure by 700 billion Yen [2]. He was not interested in spending any additional money to modernize existing equipment.

To support the intended improvement in competitiveness, Nissan had to ensure that their infrastructure supported the additional workload. There was no way they could do the intended improvement in efficiencies without external support. Nissan did not have the expertise and the additional work force to handle the required upgrades and the reengineering of business processes.

III. Final assessment and summation of the relationship

Robert Greenberg, Nissan’s CIO of North America was on record as saying in 2006 that, “We were happy with the services from IBM but the world had changed.” This comment sums up the relationship as it stands now, almost 8 years later [5]. When Nissan announced its Revival Plan, in 1999, the company had very clear objectives; cut costs, and return to profitability.

Nissan was looking for help in 1999 and IBM fulfilled this role for their IT Infrastructure. Greenberg also stated in his Q&A that “One of the things that also took place with the original outsourcing to IBM was we probably outsourced too much.” [5]

Greenberg was not working for Nissan when the original outsourcing decision was made in 1999; he only joined the company in 2005. He is on record though as saying that he thought that they should have either retained some of the infrastructure in-house or perhaps have multi-sourced, thereby ensuring that they had the best possible solution and price.

In 2006, when the contract came up for renewal, the CIO decided to put everything out to bid and compare what the other vendors were offering with what IBM had provided for so many years. The decision to look at new vendors was actually excellent timing for the company as Nissan had decided to relocate their North American corporate headquarters from Los Angeles, CA to Nashville, TN and any transition could be timed to coincide with the move.

Ultimately, what Greenberg opted to do was to accept IBM’s proposal to “manage desktop systems, network services, help desks, dealer systems, and other key infrastructure elements for Nissan North America.” He then outsourced the application and maintenance to an Indian firm, Satyam and brought the remainder of the services back in-house [5].

When asked about the decision to bring IT back in-house, Greenberg said, “By bringing it in-house you increase the alignment. It’s a matter of building the knowledge internally [that] can be used to help drive the business activity, which is much harder when a business analyst function is sitting within a third party.” [5]

IV. Does the cost of implementing an in-house solution outweigh the benefits or does BPO make more sense?

As Stephen Withers stated in his article, BPO decisions should not be made for cost-cutting exercises but rather for strategic directions [1]. In other words, companies should not view BPO as a cost saving tool. Outsourcing the IT operation makes sense when an organization is looking to improve efficiencies and business processes or when they cannot attract, or retain, the human capital who have the expertise and ability to modernize or improve the infrastructure.

Nissan’s CIO Robert Greenberg thought that he would actually save money by bringing some of the work back in-house because he was “not paying margin on the individual [headcount].” [5]

Some of the individual lessons that Nissan’s Greenberg has learnt from the outsourcing agreement with IBM has been that certain services developed by the IT organization can indeed be outsourced or developed externally. However, he felt strongly about retaining in-house IT skills in such value generation areas as business analysts who have a strong understanding of the business, sometimes even better than the business customer does. Insourcing these skills could result in ideas and dialog with the business, with the end result being a service delivery or product development than can then be outsourced.

In summary, the answer to the question, ‘Does the cost of implementing an in-house solution outweigh the benefits or does Business Process Outsourcing make more sense?’ is that it depends. It depends on the available skills; it depends on the overall objectives (cost saving vs. process improvement) and it depends on the organization. For the most part the majority of major corporations world wide that have been through an outsourcing contract or are in an outsourcing contract will agree that there are substantial benefits to implementing an outsourcing contract and there substantial benefits in retaining those skills in-house. What each organization needs to do is ascertain which of those benefits outweigh the other and base their decision on that analysis.

Works Cited

[1] Withers, Stephen. “BPO: Save money or fix your processes?” ZDNet.com

[http://www.zdnet.com.au/insight/business/soa/BPO-Save-money-or-fix-your-processes-/0],139023749,139156391-10,00.htm 17 August 2004. Downloaded October 22, 2007

[2] Magee, David. Turn Around: How Carlos Ghosn rescued Nissan. New York: HarperCollins Publishers Inc, 2003.

[3] Moynihan, Ann. “Outsourcing enables owner to focus on core business.” http://www.bizjournals.com/albany/stories/2002/10/14/focus10.html October 11, 2002. Downloaded October 22, 2007

[4] IBM Press room press releases. IBM.com “Extending Their Global Partnership, Nissan, and IBM Announce IS Outsourcing for Japan” http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/1670.wss June 19, 2000. Downloaded October 19, 2007

[5] Thibodeau, Patrick. “Q&A: Nissan CIO reshapes automaker’s IT”

[http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=110024&intsrc=industry_list] March 29, 2006. Downloaded October 23, 2007

[7] McDougall, Paul. “IBM, Nissan Outsourcing Deal Spans The Globe” http://www.informationweek.com/outsourcing/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=181502685 March 10, 2006 10:00 AM. Downloaded November 02, 2007

[8] Ikin, Paul. IBM Representative on Nissan Global team. 1998 to 2001.

Dog Training School Resistor Chip Loan Stock

January 15th, 2012 by InfoMan | Comments Off

hey guys in this video i show yous how to record cinimatics with blackops private match record console method and also motion tracking

Nutritional Health Supplements Vitamins Supplement Broker Property

January 3rd, 2012 by InfoMan | Comments Off

Defect management is considered as one of the important aspects of any software development project. We all know that software defects in any development project/program are inevitable. But we can definitely minimize their number and impact on the projects by utilizing efficient defect management software.

An ideal and efficient defect management process helps the team focus on preventing defects. While preventing defects may not be practically possible, we can definitely work towards identifying defects early in the software development cycle to minimize their impact. Defect prevention should begin with the assessment of critical risks. It is crucial for defect prevention as it allows people to know the types of defects that are most likely to occur and the ones that have the greatest impact. Strategies can then be developed to prevent them.

Traditional or paper-based defect tracking management, implemented in a standalone fashion, can no longer address the complexity and pace of change in modern software development when there are huge programs with hundreds and thousands of defects. In a modern software development environment, defect management processes must be tightly interlinked with all of the other software development processes.

An effective defect tracking software automates and simplifies the process of defect management. It tracks bugs, defects, calls, tasks and enhancements through the entire software development life cycle. Defect measurement should be integrated into the software development process and be used by the project team to improve the process. In other words, the project staff, by doing their job, should capture information on defects at the source.

The software also allows geographically dispersed project development and quality assurance teams to work in collaboration. It is essential for improving project quality and managing future requests from customers.

Characteristics/Elements of an efficient Defect Management Software

The defect tracking software must be simple enough so that no special training is required to understand its usage, but it must also ensure that the minimum necessary information is captured. The information captured should be enough to reproduce the defect and allow development teams to determine the root cause and impact.

Besides organizing defects, enhancements and bugs, in a way that suits the business needs, it’ll help the team know how close it is to completing products, projects or maintenance releases. Product bugs and defects will no longer be left unanswered and forgotten. This will result in an improvement in the overall quality of the software that is delivered.

In case of high severity bugs and defects reported by the client, automatic email notifications can be sent to the staff no matter where they are and then they can immediately resolve their issues simply by working from an internet browser.

Powerful search capabilities make it easy for users who are planning to enter a defect report to determine if the defect has already been reported and thus avoid posting of duplicate reports. Most of the clients can fix many of their own problems without ever having to call technical support. It should keep a complete audit trail of all activities associated with a defect.

In a nutshell, defect management software helps companies ensure that all defects and bugs reported by their clients and staff are properly defined, prioritized, corrected, fixed and delivered. The software can help you create better quality products, deliver them on time, and give you a better relationship with your clients.

How To Learn Italian Decorative Wall Plates

December 28th, 2011 by InfoMan | Comments Off

We are Professional of GPS Tracking in Thailand. Call Now !! Tel:6681-4358098 .

Visit : samsung led tv Orlando Culinary School Gateway Vista Swimming Results

April 30th, 2011 by InfoMan | Comments Off

Mobi Stealth Blackberry Video Recording Tutorial

Recommend : Baby Food Brother Printers Asp Hosting Services

April 19th, 2011 by InfoMan | Comments Off

www.gwt4all.com Global Wealth Trade corp. is a USA-incorporated, and Canada-registered jewelry company with its head office in Toronto, Canada. Global Wealth Trade Corp is a company that is dedicated to delivering designer fine jewelry to end users at near wholesale prices. Our method of distribution helps promote small business concept to potential entrepreneurs who are looking to start their own business. The company has already developed one-of-a-kind marketing tool called the 1-2-3 Wealth Building System. This system allows the entrepreneurs to expand their business globally and be able to monitor their sales and profits through our state-of-the-art sales tracking software. http The company was formed in March 2005, and has utilized direct selling as its method of distribution using the state-of-the-art web technology. The Company’s corporate team consists of experienced management, marketing, and IT personnel who have worked together for the past 12 years. The Company’s founder and CEO Mr. Ramin Mesgarlou entered the direct selling industry in 1990. Today he is regarded as one of the most recognized direct selling leaders in Canada. The Company’s product development team consists of experienced jewelry manufacturers and designers who have been in the jewelry industry for over 120 years, and holds operations in three continents around the globe. GWT Corp. will be taking advantage of a trillion dollar market in four different industries: e-commerce, home-based business …

Recommend : Baby Food samsung led tv blog genesis Harley Davidson Helmet California Dui Attorney

April 10th, 2011 by InfoMan | Comments Off

A condense version of our previous call tracking video. This video is uploaded to help potential customers understand what Dynamic Interactive can provide when it comes to Call Tracking Software. The video also provides examples of what call tracking can be utilized for when it comes to marketing and advertising ROI analytics. Need Call Tracking? calltracking.dynamicic.com Want to find out more about Dynamic Interactive? http If you would like to find out more or get a demo please call 1-800-951-6599

Visit : Free Blog shopping-in-us Laminate Wood Asbestos Lung Cancer Disease Donating Cars

April 8th, 2011 by InfoMan | Comments Off

Account executive Matt Fay discusses the features and benefits of Mongoose Metrics’ integration with Google Analytics as a part of the company’s call tracking solution. For more information call 1.877.784.0496 or visit www.mongoosemetrics.com

Related : shoppingstores myblogtrade exodusdigg Swimming Flippers Home Refinance Bad Credit Expense Tracking

April 5th, 2011 by InfoMan | Comments Off

Manage external service is a software for monitoring and maintenance staff in the feild all fully automatic industrial sectors.To Their mission is the monitoring and management of your own, such as personnel tracking area, instant stock request, sales data tab, tracking interactions with customers. For more information call 9841088.886000. For more information visit or contact plz managefieldstaff.com 9841088.886000. To other software for Excel CDTech smsbroadcaster.in http http plugin

Thanks To : Baby Food inewblog Buy Audiobooks

March 30th, 2011 by InfoMan | Comments Off