A general discussion on Indian consultancies and racism...

[suityou01]

It's only been rubbish since he outsourced it.

Well quite.

Off to bed.

Tata for now.

[doodab]

Tata for now.

Wipro for later?

[suityou01]

Wipro for later?

[suityou01]

Cannot believe MF has not been in this thread poluting it with his usual cretinous bile. What a bedwetter.

[ChimpMaster]

Cannot believe MF has not been in this thread poluting it with his usual cretinous bile. What a bedwetter.

Good morning fellow buddy Infotech needful deed do-ers!

[NotAllThere]

Please revert the same.

[Sid]

Yeah and you can go sh1t in your back garden but you choose to do in in a private toilet. Both achieve the same result but one way is better than the other, isn't it?

Your problem is (I mean apart from an inability to write coherently and without error) is that you accept mediocre as your normal standard. I hold my work to very high standards and I expect the same of others, regardless of what you are being paid: if you accept the job you damn well better be capable of doing it to a decent standard.

I think you should ask your client manager to go for offshored Managed Services, that way the sh*t stays in the offshore back garden and you don't get to see it in your own holy loo.
1. Client to Indian IT consultancy1 - "Here are my business requirements and project timelines, pls design and code them in whatever sh***y way you want to do so. And you don't need to get it reviewed by ChimpMaster"
2. Client to Indian IT consultancy2 - "Some sh***y stuff will be delivered by your compatriots. These are my SLAs and you need to support the sh** 24/7 using whatever tools you seem fit, might be a shovel, a crowbar or your own two fingers."

If you treat IT consultancies(Indian or otherwise) as body shoppers, why should they own the risk of what the bodies produce eventually???... that is the client's risk. But if you pin them down on a fixed price quote, liability clauses, SLAs and warranty they will be sh** scared to deliver anything bad. It all boils down to the art of vendor management and risk transfer which I have seen successful project managers do.

[cojak]

It all boils down to the art of vendor management and risk transfer which I have seen successful project managers do.

100% agree with this. During the time Sainsbury's was bring it's IT back to in-house I spoke to a couple of Gartner chaps .

They simply said 'outsource the work, not the problem'.

Most companies are absolutely crap when it comes to vendor management.

[doodab]

Most companies are absolutely crap when it comes to vendor management.

That tends to correlate quite strongly with being crap at managing things in house. When this is constantly over budget and failing they decide outsourcing is going to solve the problem rather than realising that the problem is their crappy management.

[eek]

100% agree with this. During the time Sainsbury's was bring it's IT back to in-house I spoke to a couple of Gartner chaps .

They simply said 'outsource the work, not the problem'.

Most companies are absolutely crap when it comes to vendor management.

Isn't it a case of outsource the work and you outsource your underling's problems and job.

Outsource the problem and you are outsourcing your own problems and your job.