{"id":1287,"date":"2013-02-15T16:57:00","date_gmt":"2013-02-15T16:57:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/projects\/horsesforsources\/mid-management-influence_021513\/"},"modified":"2013-02-15T16:57:00","modified_gmt":"2013-02-15T16:57:00","slug":"mid-management-influence_021513","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.horsesforsources.com\/mid-management-influence_021513\/","title":{"rendered":"Why middle management is often as influential as the C-Suite when it comes to outsourcing"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"The official definition of insanity:<\/strong> asking the same question over and over again, from every conceivable angle, and always arriving at the same conclusion.<\/p>\n

The official definition of insanity in sourcing:<\/strong> recounting how many times a service provider has asked you,\u00a0“We’ve got to get to the C-suite to pitch innovative ideas, because middle management is too risk adverse.”<\/p>\n

So who better to analyse sourcing insanity than HfS’ own sourcing insanity analyst, Tony Filippone<\/a>…<\/em><\/p>\n

Are service providers addressing the right audiences?<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Is there really<\/em> a disconnect between senior executives and the rest of their teams regarding the importance of innovation during service provider selection? Will ideas fall on deaf ears unless a service provider can schmooze a CFO? Are service providers addressing the right audiences? We asked a few questions in our State of Outsourcing survey to delve deeper into the topic…<\/p>\n

To begin with, we can bust part of this myth once and for all. Namely, during evaluations of service providers is the executive suite the only group interested in transformational and innovative ideas while the junior ranks are concerned with process efficiency and execution? When asked which was more important, senior executives favored execution over innovation 71% of the time. That result is statistically consistent with opinions of their middle management (73%) and junior management (70%).\u00a0All levels of buyer organizations are severely and equally biased toward process efficiency and execution issues, which strongly supports our research findings<\/a> that motivations of buyers are firm focused on cost reduction. Transformational ideas are going to fall on relatively deaf ears at all levels of the organization.<\/p>\n

Exhibit 1: \u201cWhich is more important: Execution or Innovation?\u201d<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Is time spent with the C-suite worthwhile?<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

But isn\u2019t there value to schmoozing up the C-suite? Aren\u2019t senior executives swayed more often by relationships over delivery capability than their middle management? Is time spent with the C-suite worthwhile?<\/p>\n

This is another myth we\u2019ve bused. We asked whether customer relationship skills were more important than delivery capability during service provider selection, and senior and middle management have statistically similar opinions. For both groups, nearly 30% feel relationships are more important than delivery capability, about 40% feel the opposite, and 30% feel the issues are equal. Junior management is where the switch in perspectives appears. While a similar percentage of junior managers find relationships more important (28%), 52% believe delivery capability is more important and just 10% find the areas equally important. Energy to build relationships therefore is best spent on directors, vice presidents, and senior executives who all find relationships more important than their frontline staff.<\/p>\n

Exhibit 2: \u201cWhich is more important: Customer Relationship or Delivery Capability?\u201d<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The Bottom Line: Don\u2019t Sell Execution Capabilities Short<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Our newest data should help service providers build the right strategies to address potential customer interests. Most importantly, all service providers should realize:<\/p>\n