Outsourcing OSS (cont'd)

Similarly, while some group or function may appear perfectly suited for outsourcing, internal process dependencies can make it impossible. Stories abound of carriers shipping out a process only to realize that several other groups that had depended on this process were now hung out to dry. In a knee jerk reaction, the folks that were downsized in favor of outsourcing are brought back – sometimes at a higher cost – to close the gap.

Further, critical network operations can be “unforgiving,” says Feness, making the risk of even a perceived lack of control intolerable. Sending basic functions like data entry out is one thing, but core operations cannot fail, once again making the need for perceived control the dominant decision making factor.

Perception is very much at play here, particularly for the investment community. It would not do to have investors, analysts and reporters asking too many questions around outsourcing. What is a wise business decision could be painted as a lack of competence in running core operations, or unpatriotic practice when domestic jobs are sent to other countries. When the onlookers don't understand the inner workings of the business, it's easy to invent such misconceptions – and it makes for sensational news. In the end, however, stock valuations and public relations can suffer, which is why carriers are smart not to reveal too many details of their outsourcing plans.

Different Approaches
Thus far outsourcing has been addressed generally, but there are in fact several different models to consider. One option is pure hosting where a set of systems or processes are moved from the carrier to an outsourcer's data center where they are then managed, maintained, operated and in some cases automated and improved (see Q&A: Synchronoss Technologies). This kind of outsourcing is done, though it is currently the exception and not the rule. There are offerings that focus on order and circuit provisioning and network management that fall into this domain, though fewer on the provisioning side. Insiders report, for example, that Verizon Wireless sends much of its backhaul circuit provisioning out to its equipment vendor, Alcatel. In this case, however, the arrangement was reportedly driven by a lack of provisioning interfaces or workable EMSs from Alcatel and the resulting cost of inefficiency was pushed back on the vendor.

Find out More Here

Another approach is the reverse, where systems and processes remain on-site with the carrier, but are run by the outsourcing partner. Sprint, for example, recently signed an extensive agreement with IBM for such services. Under this agreement, Sprint employees were essentially “re-badged” as IBM employees. According to insiders who have requested anonymity, this change has – in many cases – had a negative impact on morale. Once again, perception plays a role - people feel that much closer to the chopping block, even if it's not the case. More forward thinkers, however, see the change as an opportunity for advancement in an organization like IBM that arguably has more potential career paths for IT and operations experts than does a large carrier. According to Mark Wiess of IBM who is responsible for OSS alliances and offerings, this kind of arrangement is in place at Sprint, but has received little more than “tire-kicking” attention from other large carriers.

The IBM-Sprint relationship is “like the fox in the henhouse,” says Nimal Gamage, chief OSS architect for Agilent Technologies. According to Gamage, Sprint is interested in having a third party come in to keep on eye on how well IBM is running its network, rather than only relying on IBM's own performance reporting. This is more a matter of instituting business controls than a lack of trust obviously, but it also shows that this kind of “in-sourcing” model is new, in question and not without some basic risks. “Outsourcing OSS is still in an early adopter phase,” says Gamage.

«Prev    Next »   |   1   |   2   |   3   |   Subscribe

Send Comment

© 2005, All information contained herein is the sole property of Pipeline Publishing, LLC. Pipeline Publishing LLC reserves all rights and privileges regarding the use of this information. Any unauthorized use, such as copying, modifying, or reprinting, will be prosecuted under the fullest extent under the governing law.