Posts Tagged ‘Anand’

The global Marketing & Sales organization

Tuesday, May 4th, 2010
As referenced in my earlier entry about globalization of corporate wide functions:
Research & Development
Marketing & Sales – Covered in this blog
Finance & Accounting
Human Resources
Internal IT
Procurement
End Customer Services & Support
This entry will focus on the globalization aspects and the newer models in marketing & sales.
To classify broadly Sales consists of Sales Management (Customer profiling, proposal documentation, cross/up selling, sales force planning etc.) and Sales Support (account management, customer relationship management, training, database management etc.) and Marketing consists of Marketing & Brand Management (Advertisements, collaterals, media planning & strategy, public relations, events & campaign management) and Market Intelligence (Market research, competitive analysis, market segmentation & sampling, business analysis)
With every company small and large going global these days bits and pieces of the above are probably done out of every corner of the world. Statistically speaking, companies typically spend 22 – 30% of their net sales on marketing & sales which accounts for 30 – 35% of the total headcount. In this function the cost per resource is considerably low since globalization here is an imperative here and not an option if companies want extended customer reach and better market understanding.
A company with say 100,000 employees has about 30,000 – 35,000 of its employees working in Marketing & Sales spread out in scores of countries. Interesting thing to know is what exactly these resources are doing. With sales support and market intelligence being the relatively more people intensive groups, the math would suggest that a significant chunk of these folks would be working for these activities. Each location would need a bunch of people into these activities to effectively cater to that that market but in reality these majority of these resources perform redundant tasks and are under-utilized which makes us question their presence in the first place.
In the wake of this reality and popularization of a model, which I am sure most of the readers of this blog are aware of, called Shared Services, companies are increasingly exploring to offshore their Marketing & sales teams in this model.  To narrow down on the scope of offshorability, Sales Management and Marketing & Brand Management are relatively harder to segregate out given their close ties to the HQ and multiple other stakeholders.
The sales organizations of technology product companies typically drive sales through multiple ways: Direct Sales, Channel Sales, OEM Sales etc. and this is a tightly knit network and pulling these people away from each other would be nothing short of committing a corporate suicide.
So the beauty of this Shared Services Model (without going into the finer details) is that redundant tasks can be eliminated, resources can be fully utilized and the best part is they can work in an offshore model (at least a few of them) – ergo, cost optimization.
Some quick analysis of a bunch of companies that actually are well into this model shows that the ones with revenues less than USD 5 billion have about 3 shared services locations and the ones between USD 5 – 20 billion have about 5 locations and the ones above USD 20 billion have about 7. Having spoken to the senior management teams of these companies, on an average they have been able to realize about 15 – 20 % cost savings in this model.
I think this as a trend would continue to rise in the coming years, primarily because the highly offshorable/ transaction driven functions like R&D and F&A are pretty much under cruise control for most of the companies and M&S is the next logical thing to look at.

Author: Anand Tatambhotla, Consultant – Globalization Advisory

As referenced in my earlier entry about globalization of corporate wide functions:

  1. Research & Development
  2. Marketing & Sales – Covered in this blog
  3. Finance & Accounting
  4. Human Resources
  5. Internal IT
  6. Procurement
  7. End Customer Services & Support

This entry will focus on the globalization aspects and the newer models in marketing & sales.

To classify broadly Sales consists of Sales Management (Customer profiling, proposal documentation, cross/up selling, sales force planning etc.) and Sales Support (account management, customer relationship management, training, database management etc.) and Marketing consists of Marketing & Brand Management (Advertisements, collaterals, media planning & strategy, public relations, events & campaign management) and Market Intelligence (Market research, competitive analysis, market segmentation & sampling, business analysis)

With every company small and large going global these days bits and pieces of the above are probably done out of every corner of the world. Statistically speaking, companies typically spend 22 – 30% of their net sales on marketing & sales which accounts for 30 – 35% of the total headcount. In this function the cost per resource is considerably low since globalization here is an imperative here and not an option if companies want extended customer reach and better market understanding.

A company with say 100,000 employees has about 30,000 – 35,000 of its employees working in Marketing & Sales spread out in scores of countries. Interesting thing to know is what exactly these resources are doing. With sales support and market intelligence being the relatively more people intensive groups, the math would suggest that a significant chunk of these folks would be working for these activities. Each location would need a bunch of people into these activities to effectively cater to that that market but in reality these majority of these resources perform redundant tasks and are under-utilized which makes us question their presence in the first place.

In the wake of this reality and popularization of a model, which I am sure most of the readers of this blog are aware of, called Shared Services, companies are increasingly exploring to offshore their Marketing & sales teams in this model.  To narrow down on the scope of offshorability, Sales Management and Marketing & Brand Management are relatively harder to segregate out given their close ties to the HQ and multiple other stakeholders.

The sales organizations of technology product companies typically drive sales through multiple ways: Direct Sales, Channel Sales, OEM Sales etc. and this is a tightly knit network and pulling these people away from each other would be nothing short of committing a corporate suicide.

So the beauty of this Shared Services Model (without going into the finer details) is that redundant tasks can be eliminated, resources can be fully utilized and the best part is they can work in an offshore model (at least a few of them) – ergo, cost optimization.

Some quick analysis of a bunch of companies that actually are well into this model shows that the ones with revenues less than USD 5 billion have about 3 shared services locations and the ones between USD 5 – 20 billion have about 5 locations and the ones above USD 20 billion have about 7. Having spoken to the senior management teams of these companies, on an average they have been able to realize about 15 – 20 % cost savings in this model.

I think this as a trend would continue to rise in the coming years, primarily because the highly offshorable/ transaction driven functions like R&D and F&A are pretty much under cruise control for most of the companies and M&S is the next logical thing to look at.

*Unless specified Views/Opinions Expressed in the blog are those of an Individual Consultants.

Research and Development in a distributed world…

Tuesday, April 27th, 2010
To take my previous entry here on Globalization being an innovation imperative further, I am going to elaborate on my learning from performing multiple globalization benchmarking and portfolio optimization studies in the past couple of years.
I am going to cover all the corporate wide functions (detailed below) in individual entries.
Research & Development – Covered in this blog
Marketing & Sales
Finance & Accounting
Human Resources
Internal IT
Procurement
End Customer Services & Support
Quick disclaimer – The data/ insights are for technology product companies spanning across software, computer hardware, telecom/ networking, semiconductor verticals; In my opinion offshore locations typically mean India & China, I would not to the extent of including Israel here because the cost is significantly high and the engineers there for some reason have ridiculously high innovation levels.
Ok so moving on from introductions and disclaimers, technology product companies typically have spent about 16% of their net sales on research & development. This number is higher for companies in hardware/ infrastructure intensive verticals such as telecom/ networking or semiconductors by about 5 – 6 percentage points. A lot of changes have happened to this number over the last 6 – 8 quarters because of our friends in Wall Street. But historically speaking, the companies that have bet their money on R&D and innovation have assured future revenue streams and are actually doing much better than the others even in the short term.
Talking on the headcount context, Research & Development accounts for about 32 – 38% of the global headcount of the companies.  These two numbers show how the whole globally distributed R&D team is neatly packed cost wise.  The average leverage ratio (Headcount outside of the HQ country to the total Headcount) for these companies is about 47%. That’s huge considering that the large sized companies like Microsoft or Cisco have about a total of over 30,000 people working under R&D.
In my earlier post, I have elaborated how the offshore teams predominantly exist to offset costs or cater to the lower end of R&D value chain. This saps about half of the innovation bandwidth of a company. Although I am not saying that innovation does not happen in offshore locations like India or China but the “innovation gap” is so huge that if plotted on an excel chart, it would take a person six feet high standing on the offshore column to reach the column for the HQ.
The large sized companies (Net Sales > USD 20 Bn) have got it right, at least now, largely through trial and error but nevertheless right. Some of them have even gone to the extent of having dedicated 30 member research (not R&D, just hard core research) teams in the remotest, hostile locations deep in the south American rain forests or Siberia, Russia and hire the smartest of the talent in that country and are able to independently innovate.
The root cause of all the innovation related challenges in the offshore locations can be understood by looking at how the globalized R&D value chain looks like in this distributed world – The core and most critical part of the value chain, Product Conceptualization, is predominantly restricted to the HQ. The chunks of less complex tasks are sent to these offshore locations who engage with the service providers, who honestly don’t know the “I” in product innovation.
In my opinion companies should have regional leadership teams who handle the entire product development cycle from the offshore locations itself. This solves two purposes first one being the complete and effective leverage of the local talent and the second being reverse innovation.
Stay tuned for more insights about the globalization insights into the other corporate functions.

To take my previous entry here on Globalization being an innovation imperative further, I am going to elaborate on my learning from performing multiple globalization benchmarking and portfolio optimization studies in the past couple of years.

I am going to cover all the corporate wide functions (detailed below) in individual entries.

  1. Research & Development – Covered in this blog
  2. Marketing & Sales
  3. Finance & Accounting
  4. Human Resources
  5. Internal IT
  6. Procurement
  7. End Customer Services & Support

Quick disclaimer – The data/ insights are for technology product companies spanning across software, computer hardware, telecom/ networking, semiconductor verticals; In my opinion offshore locations typically mean India & China, I would not to the extent of including Israel here because the cost is significantly high and the engineers there for some reason have ridiculously high innovation levels.

Ok so moving on from introductions and disclaimers, technology product companies typically have spent about 16% of their net sales on research & development. This number is higher for companies in hardware/ infrastructure intensive verticals such as telecom/ networking or semiconductors by about 5 – 6 percentage points. A lot of changes have happened to this number over the last 6 – 8 quarters because of our friends in Wall Street. But historically speaking, the companies that have bet their money on R&D and innovation have assured future revenue streams and are actually doing much better than the others even in the short term.

Talking on the headcount context, Research & Development accounts for about 32 – 38% of the global headcount of the companies.  These two numbers show how the whole globally distributed R&D team is neatly packed cost wise.  The average leverage ratio (Headcount outside of the HQ country to the total Headcount) for these companies is about 47%. That’s huge considering that the large sized companies like Microsoft or Cisco have about a total of over 30,000 people working under R&D.

In my earlier post, I have elaborated how the offshore teams predominantly exist to offset costs or cater to the lower end of R&D value chain. This saps about half of the innovation bandwidth of a company. Although I am not saying that innovation does not happen in offshore locations like India or China but the “innovation gap” is so huge that if plotted on an excel chart, it would take a person six feet high standing on the offshore column to reach the column for the HQ.

The large sized companies (Net Sales > USD 20 Bn) have got it right, at least now, largely through trial and error but nevertheless right. Some of them have even gone to the extent of having dedicated 30 member research (not R&D, just hard core research) teams in the remotest, hostile locations deep in the south American rain forests or Siberia, Russia and hire the smartest of the talent in that country and are able to independently innovate.

The root cause of all the innovation related challenges in the offshore locations can be understood by looking at how the globalized R&D value chain looks like in this distributed world – The core and most critical part of the value chain, Product Conceptualization, is predominantly restricted to the HQ. The chunks of less complex tasks are sent to these offshore locations who engage with the service providers, who honestly don’t know the “I” in product innovation.

In my opinion companies should have regional leadership teams who handle the entire product development cycle from the offshore locations itself. This solves two purposes first one being the complete and effective leverage of the local talent and the second being reverse innovation.

Stay tuned for more insights about the globalization insights into the other corporate functions.

Author: Anand Tatambhotla, Consultant

*Unless specified Views/Opinions Expressed in the blog are those of an Individual Consultants.