Legal biz Irwin Mitchell outsources majority of IT to Esteem Law firm Irwin Mitchell is to outsource IT operations to Esteem from Monday, with the “majority” of staff expected to be TUPEd across, although some are refusing to relocate 200 miles to the Woking call centre The desktop support function was already contracted to Esteem at the end of 2012 for £1.7m with 15 people joining the …
"Cue happy bean counters, unhappy end-users."
Ah, but in a law firm the bean counters are mere "support staff" themselves. Then there's bog standard fee earners, and then the people who really count, the partners.
So this deal sets things up for an interesting dynamic. Most "outsource" arrangements involve a supplier who can run rings round the client on the SLA and the contract terms - but in this case they'll be dealing with a buyer who fully expects their pound of flesh. The other thing is that normally, outsourcing results in poor service that hampers the customer's staff, but the outsourcer can then use smoke and mirrors to manage the relationship with the absolute handful of key decision makers - so golf days for the CEO always trump providing decent IT for the peasants. But in a law firm all partners consider themselves equal, and in Irwin Mitchell's case that's 180 key stakeholders to manage. People who in my experience get irate very rapidly.
So the partners will appreciate the savings since they share the firms profits. But the vendor may come to regret taking on a law firm as a customer....
Having being on the sharp end of outsourcing (for one of IMs competitors) and being in the presence of pure evil aga... I mean, seeing IT services being outsourced in my current employ I can only agree with the previous comments.
I would be inclined to suggest that outsourcing for IM is not about achieving scalability, it's either about minimising exposure as an employer or they've got their IT services in such a completely mismanaged tangle that their only realistic option is to outsource and make it SEP.
@Previous AC. This is the current situation I find myself observing; consultancy involved because of lack of confidence in IT services (poor internal management and terrible comms), consultancy now providing 1st and 2nd line support direct to end users and expect to take over basic AD management sometime soon, user expectations are at an all-time low (two months to even pick up a ticket ? Please...) but as far as exec team are concerned it's "all gravy 'cos the consultant said it was, innit". Or something like that.
IMO consultants and outsourcers should be prohibited from ever getting regular direct access to board members / partners - their interests are naturally self-serving and what they perceive as the customer (exec team) isn't the service recipient. Sad days.
AC for obvious reasons...
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
