The Choice of work for Outsourcing: Assessment Tools
https://doi.org/10.26794/2404-022X-2020-10-1-6-21
Abstract
The more extensive usage of outsourcing technology poses the challenge for enterprise management to identify possible benefits and problems of such cooperation. For this reason, the purpose of this study is to establish a procedure to determine the operations most suitable for outsourcing. The methodological base of the work consists of the new institutional economic theory provisions; situational analysis, mathematical and logical modeling of the identified relationships are used as methods of study. As a research result, the author detailed the elaboration of criteria that determine the effectiveness of the business processes transfer of the company to an external operator. As well as he specified the sequence of their application within a single procedure of the assessment. There are combined the specified factors in four directions, which characterize the key organizational and economic aspects of outsourcing. The specific feature of the approach is the consideration not only of traditional parameters related to the study of customer requests and the contractor capabilities, but also the nature of the relationship between the parties, as well as the state of the market environment in which the work is carried out. In conclusion, the author proposed an algorithm forexpress-assessment of the effectiveness of the transfer of operations to a third-party operator, based on the introduced approach. The results obtained will be useful to managers for identifying business development opportunities based on the outsourcing.
Supporting agencies: The reported study was funded by RFBR within the project No. 20–010–00226.
About the Author
D. A. Zhdanov
Central Economics and Mathematics Institute, RAS
Russian Federation
Dmitrii A. — Dr. Sci. (Econ.), Leading Researcher
Russian Federation
Dmitrii A. — Dr. Sci. (Econ.), Leading Researcher
References
1. Kotlyarov I. D. Outsourcer’s decision on cooperation with the customer based on the criterion of the expected economic effect. Problemy ekonomiki i upravleniya neftegazovym kompleksom = Problems of Economics and Management of Oil and Gas Complex. 2013;(7):15–20. (In Russ.).
2. Nazarova V. V., Yur’eva D. A. Assessing the effectiveness of the outsourcing system in the enterprise. Vestnik NGUEU = Vestnik NSUEM. 2014;(3):193–208. (In Russ.).
3. Lacity M., Willcocks L. Nine keys to world-class business process outsourcing. London: Bloomsbury Information; 2015. 264 p.
4. Cullen S., Lacity M., Willcocks L. P. Outsourcing: All you need to know. San Bernardino: White Plume Publishing; 2014. 518 p.
5. Moiseeva N. K., Malyutina O. N., Moskvina I. A. Outsourcing in the development of business partnerships. Moscow: Finansy i statistika; INFRA-M; 2010. 240 p. (In Russ.).
6. Khlebnikov D. Outsourcing as a tool to reduce costs and optimize a business system. iTeam. 2010. URL: https://blog.iteam.ru/autsorsing-kak-instrument-snizheniya-zatrat-i-optimizatsii-biznes-sistemy/ (accessed on 20.07.2019). (In Russ.).
7. Kurbanov A. Kh., Plotnikov V. A. Outsourcing: History, methodology, practice. Moscow: INFRA-M; 2012. 112 p. (In Russ.).
8. Stapran D. A. Outsourcing in logistics: How to maximize profit and optimize costs. Moscow: INFRA-M; 2017. 114 p. (In Russ.).
9. Mukhina I. S. Analysis of existing approaches to assessing the effectiveness of outsourcing. Sibirskaya finansovaya shkola = Siberian Financial School. 2008;(6):111–115. (In Russ.).
10. Giertl G., Potkány M. Gejdoš M. Evaluation of outsourcing efficiency through costs for its use. Procedia Economics and Finance. 2015;26:1080–1085. DOI: 10.1016/S 2212–5671(15)00933–8
11. Popova-Shchelkan E. S. Improving the management system for the operation of commercial real estate based on outsourcing cooperation. Cand. econ. sci. diss. Moscow: State Univ. of Management; 2012. 195 p. (In Russ.).
12. Grunichev Yu. A. Research and development of a methodology for evaluating the economic efficiency of outsourcing and insourcing of IT services. Cand. econ. sci. diss. Moscow: Moscow Technical Univ. of Communications and Informatics; 2010. 206 p. (In Russ.).
13. Kotlyarov I. D. Algorithm for selecting outsourcers by the criterion of ability to provide target values of indicators describing the transferred process. Problemy ekonomiki i upravleniya neftegazovym kompleksom = Problems of Economics and Management of Oil and Gas Complex. 2012;(10):50–54. (In Russ.).
14. Tambovtsev V. L. A construct of trust in management studies. Rossiiskii zhurnal menedzhmenta = Russian Management Journal. 2018;16(4):577–600. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.21638/spbu18.2018.406
15. Fink M., Harms R., Möllering G. Introduction: A strategy for overcoming the definitional struggle. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation. 2010;11(2):101–105. DOI: 10.5367/000000010791291839
16. Moorman C., Zaltman G., Deshpande R. Relationships between providers and users of market research: The dynamics of trust within and between organizations. Journal of Marketing Research. 1992;29(3):314– 328. DOI: 10.2307/3172742
17. McEvily B., Perrone V., Zaheer A. Trust as an organizing principle. Organization Science. 2003;14(1):91– 103. DOI: 10.1287/orsc.14.1.91.12814
18. Krishnan R., Martin X., Noorderhaven N. G. When does trust matter to alliance performance? The Academy of Management Journal. 2006;49(5):894–917. DOI: 10.2307/20159808
19. Fink M., Kessler A. Cooperation, trust and performance — Empirical results from three countries. British Journal of Management. 2010;21(2):469–483. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467–8551.2009.00647.x
20. Serva M. A., Fuller M. A. The effects of trustworthiness perceptions on the formation of initial trust: Implications for MIS student teams. Journal of Information Systems Education. 2004;15(4):383–395.
21. Gill H., Boies K., Finegan J. E., McNally J. Antecedents of trust: Establishing a boundary condition for the relation between propensity to trust and intention to trust. Journal of Business and Psychology. 2005;19(3):287–302. DOI: 10.1007/s10869–004–2229–8
22. Yakovleva M., Reilly R. R., Werko R. Why do we trust? Moving beyond individual to dyadic perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2010;95(1):79–91. DOI: 10.1037/a0017102
23. Thibaut J., Kelley H. The social psychology of groups. London, New York: Routledge; 1986. 342 p.
24. Morgan R., Hunt S. The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing. 1994;58(3):20–38. DOI: 10.2307/1252308
25. Li E.-l. Economic influence analysis of offshore outsourcing based on host country’s view. International Journal of U- and E- Service, Science and Technology. 2014;7(3):63–72. DOI: 10.14257/ijunesst.2014.7.3.07
26. Brown D., Phil F. Executive report: The state of services & outsourcing in 2014. URL: http://www.kpmg-institutes.com/institutes/shared-services-outsourcing-institute/articles/2014/09/stateof-outsourcing-2014-exec-findings-hfs.html (accessed on 12.02.2019).
27. Himmelreich H., Beulen E., Subramanian A., De Rosa V. How to ensure that IT outsourcing delivers. Boston Consulting Group. 2017. URL: https://www.bcg.com/publications/2017/technology-digital-how-ensurethat-it-outsourcing-delivers.aspx (accessed on 16.11.2019).
28. Gordon Yu. Payback in five couriers. Ekspert. 2019;(40):22–25. (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Zhdanov D.A. The Choice of work for Outsourcing: Assessment Tools. Management Sciences. 2020;10(1):6-21. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.26794/2404-022X-2020-10-1-6-21
Views:
1047
Email this article 
