How can you outsource or delegate tasks without damaging your company culture?

Outsource activities that require special expertise and that are outside of your core business Outsource administrative tasks. Choose your service providers carefully and manage them with performance measurement and clear contracts.

I would add that anything that touches or has a direct impact on your clients should not be outsourced. An external party will bring their own ideas and processes which will not necessarily be congruent with your culture. It is very hard to align anyone not invested to your way of doing things.

Identifying core competencies is like a chef knowing their specialty. A chef might craft exquisite dishes but leave the accounts to experts. Similarly, Disney excels in storytelling but outsources merchandise production. Understand your unique strengths, and trust others with the rest, ensuring you deliver your best.

I want to start with the question, "Why Outsource?", not a trivial question. First, an anecdote. 20 years ago, we outsourced about a third of the employees in out manufacturing plant. Why. Nobody knew why not employ directly. We had no union, so the only"benefit" was the outsourcing company's overhead. So why outsource at all. Here are a few reason, that apply but not always: Non core tasks. Tasks that it is not possible to obtain in house. Small tasks - that require a few hours a week for example. Expertise only available outside. "Closed loop tasks" that are outside the core competency and do not require too much monitoring. Remember the fact that even when you outsource, you still need to follow and monitor the tasks.

I follow these practices > communicatе thе stratеgic rationalе transparеntly so that tеams undеrstand why thе changе is happеning and how it bеnеfits all > еngagе staff in еvaluating outsourcing/dеlеgation options to gеt buy-in to thе solution chosеn > еmphasizе thе uplifting big-picturе impact on rolеs by rеtaining valuе-addеd work and еliminating tasks > lеt еmployееs procеss and adjust to phasе changеs gradually bеforе achiеving maximum changе vеlocity > to maintain continuity, providе amplе training and knowlеdgе transfеr from currеnt tеam mеmbеrs to nеw providеrs/rolеs > еnsurе consistеnt dеlivеry of sеrvicеs from outsourcеd providеrs by dеvеloping dеtailеd sеrvicе lеvеl agrееmеnts and ovеrsight protocols

Picking the right team members or partners is much like casting for a film. You wouldn't cast someone based solely on their resume; you need chemistry, shared vision, and mutual respect. When Netflix began, they partnered with the U.S. Postal Service, a seemingly odd match. Yet, USPS had the reach and reliability Netflix needed for their DVD-by-mail model. Together, they revolutionized movie rental. In essence, it's not just about competence but alignment in purpose and the ability to harmonize. Choose those who can be co-stars in your success story.

Aligning any task with that person's natural way of working is CRITICAL if you do not want to have to manage them. You want to ensure that whatever task is allocated, that person would naturally take ownership for that task (providing they have the technical skills and experience).

Adding to Jen's post. Critical that the outsourced partner/team identify with the company (make sure they speak "we", not "you").

There are no short cuts to expressing company culture on the front line. Firstly delegating vs outsourcing are two very different playing fields. Employees can be trained and coached into company culture and measured against customer feedback (internal and external) Company culture needs to be explicit in outsourced contracts / SLA's and customer/client feed back an essential component of the delivery process. Where Net Promoter scores are unacceptable reparations need to be swift to maintain trust.

Defining the scope and expectations is crucial for clarity in any partnership. A real-life example would be when Apple collaborates with its suppliers. They meticulously detail quality standards, timelines, and deliverables. By being precise from the outset, Apple ensures that its products maintain consistent quality across the board. This level of detail minimizes miscommunication, fosters trust, and ensures that everyone involved knows their role and the larger vision. It's about setting the stage for seamless collaboration

Checking for understanding is key to this. You have to make sure that their understanding is the same as yours. It is surprisingly common for two people to use the same word or phrase but mean two completely different things. Getting someone to talk back their understanding of what needs to be done, is key. An important part of this is understanding which aspects they will prioritise under pressure.

Without monitoring and evaluating performance it is not possible to maintain the integrity of any outsourcing initiative. Regular evaluations, clear metrics, and feedback channels are key. A case I want to share is Starbucks. When they partner with coffee growers, they employ rigorous standards checks and evaluations to ensure ethical sourcing and quality. If any issues arise, Starbucks addresses them promptly, reflecting their commitment to both the quality of their product and the welfare of their partners. It’s a model of diligent oversight combined with trust

As it is very important to keep the outsource team connected, I would institute a process where the team meets with the relevant personnel in the company. The meeting start with socializing, move to reviewing the progress of the company, and only then start a review process of the outsource team. The review should be balanced, as mentioned, include "good" and 'points need fixing". Just like you expect from the internal team.

I am not sure I enjoy the concept of monitoring even though I can appreciate why it is used. For me, it implies that I do not trust you. I would much prefer "relationship" - keep connected. And they way that you do that is to talk and check that everyone is still on the same page and that expectations are clear. Proactive conversation is always better than when the ball has already been dropped.

I believe it's important to stress the point on involvement. In order to make outsourcing and delegation successful, the individuals need to be aware of the big picture. It is important that they are bought into the "why" behind the task, and understand the ultimate goal. This way the message is carried through into the task, and the individuals feel part of the mission at hand.

The key to excellent Communication starts with ensuring that everyone is in agreement with what is required. Team members then need to understand how what they do impacts others and how they need to stay connected (and the role communication plays in ensuring this.) Meetings should be geared specifically to achieve this with very specific team members in mind and should not just be generalised "noise" - the shotgun approach.

Consistent communication is vital for alignment in partnerships. For instance, Toyota regularly dialogues with its suppliers, ensuring everyone aligns with the company's mission. Through celebrating successes, collaboratively addressing challenges, and valuing contributions, Toyota fosters a culture of unity and respect. This commitment to open communication is a cornerstone of their collaborative success.

It is important to learn from the years of experience of the IT industry. 1. You can never outsource 100% of a task. 20%-30% of your or that of your team's time is still required to manage the outsourcing. 2. Trust but Verify. Methods in place to confirm quality. If it is customer facing, talk to your customers, have at least a 6% self-test... secret shopper methods. 3. Never take your hand off of the wheel. 4. Clearly understand what it really costs you to outsource. This means understanding the entire value chain. Carefully map the task... calls, conferences, re-dos, quality verification, customer issues, billing, contract management, etc.

I agree that organizations should prioritize core competencies over non-core ones. However, it's crucial to recognize that every unit in an organization should contribute value. Core services often rely on non-core functions. It's worth noting that outsourcing doesn't always lead to cost savings; in my experience, it can be expensive and requires dedicated management. Some functions, such as help desks or call centers, may be suitable for outsourcing, but it comes with inherent risks that demand a robust governance model.