Well, 90% of the time at least.
One of the main corporate values every company should strive for, no matter its size or funding, is brand equity. It usually takes a lot of time and effort, and can be destroyed in a matter of minutes following a drastic bad decision.
To work towards brand equity, a company needs to work with all its employees and instill its own corporate culture. I’m not talking about ping-pong tables or office Rock Band, I’m talking about values. “Customer First” or “Do No Evil” are interesting mottos but end up being a bit too broad and meaning little to nothing in the everyday routine if not backed up by a set of core values that every employee abides by and strives for.
That’s why outsourcing sucks. When outsourcing, companies hire what they call “collaborators” but don’t work with them. They give them work to do and expect the collaborator to get it done and get it done fast. There could be exceptions, but usually there’s no bond between the company and the collaborator beyond a contract: you give me this, I’ll give you that. How can a company instill their own corporate culture on a freelancer or someone else’s employee? Again, I’m not saying it’s impossible, I’m just saying it’s extra hard.
Bad examples of outsourcing or third-party services can quickly be found by googling complaints against major companies. Take Amazon or IKEA for example. They provide excellent service and shopping experience. Most complaints I’ve heard of them were because of their deliveries. Which one of those takes care of distribution? Neither. They sub-contract other companies, whose employees care less about the company who contracted their company. They’re working according to their company’s culture and towards its brand equity and not for those who contracted them. And let’s be honest: I’m not sure USPS/UPS/FedEx/etc employees are that worried about their company’s brand equity or culture.
Back in the IT world, why would companies choose outsourcing, something that takes away the main value a company can strive for? Because they want to increase their cash flow and hire more people than they can get work for. I’m not talking about outsourcing someone for 3 or less months either. I’m talking about companies that hire employees to work outsourced exclusively. I went through an experience where one of my managers informally asked me, around an office lunch, if I would be available to work outsourced. I was quite vocally against that prospect. I loved our company’s culture and “startup” environment. I would be working on a big corporation, at their offices and would rarely see my colleagues. Even though my role had changed into something I wasn’t particularly fond of, I preferred working there, with my colleagues, than going by myself, representing my company, into someone else’s office and team. I was still a junior and the burden of carrying my company’s brand equity was too much to bare so we parted our ways. Looking back, that was a good decision for everyone.
I just shared my particular experience to show that this feeling isn’t new and I just now chose to talk about it because of an interesting discussion on Twitter about IKEA. At first, it sounded like a complaint against IKEA. Then, I realized it had been a problem with the delivery, which isn’t handled by IKEA. At the end of the day, one thing is true: IKEA chose their distribution partner and is now suffering from lack of control over its own brand equity because their partner. I’m not saying IKEA should start their own distribution branch, but… should they?
As per usual, feel free to reply to me personally. I don’t think public comments are all too constructive, so if you want to counter my argument (please do!) or simply give me any kind of feedback, feel free to do so by email or hit me up @twitter.
