Cost reduction: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|negotiation|}}{{wasteprov|Cost}}s may arise largely as follows: | {{a|negotiation|}}{{wasteprov|Cost}}s may arise largely as follows: | ||
==={{wasteprov|Personnel}}=== | ==={{wasteprov|Personnel}}=== | ||
{{wasteprov|Personnel}} from [[Sales]], [[KYC]], [[Onboarding]], [[Credit]], [[Trading]], [[Tax]], [[Legal]]/[[Negotiation]], [[Operations]]. Costs include hidden costs like pension, redundancy expenses, national insurance and so on. All other things being equal, you can address these | {{wasteprov|Personnel}} from [[Sales]], [[KYC]], [[Onboarding]], [[Credit]], [[Trading]], [[Tax]], [[Legal]]/[[Negotiation]], [[Operations]]. Costs include hidden costs like pension, redundancy expenses, national insurance and so on. [[All other things being equal]]<ref>The {{wasteprov|fungibility}} of {{wasteprov|personnel}} is a popular falsehood of [[management consultancy]].</ref>, you can address these {{wasteprov|cost}}s as follows: | ||
*{{wasteprov|Downgrading}}: Reallocate work from more expensive units to cheaper ones. So, the negotiation process moves from [[legal]] to the [[documentation unit]], to [[operations]]. | *{{wasteprov|Downgrading}}: Reallocate work from more expensive units to cheaper ones. So, the negotiation process moves from [[legal]] to the [[documentation unit]], to [[operations]]. | ||
*{{wasteprov|Relocation}}: move work to a lower cost jurisdiction where a like-for-like personnel are cheaper: moving document management from London to Birmingham, Belfast, Madrid, Krakow, Cape Town or Bangalore. | *{{wasteprov|Relocation}}: move work to a lower cost jurisdiction where a like-for-like personnel are cheaper: moving document management from London to Birmingham, Belfast, Madrid, Krakow, Cape Town or Bangalore. | ||
Revision as of 17:12, 4 June 2019
|
Negotiation Anatomy™
|
Costs may arise largely as follows:
Personnel
Personnel from Sales, KYC, Onboarding, Credit, Trading, Tax, Legal/Negotiation, Operations. Costs include hidden costs like pension, redundancy expenses, national insurance and so on. All other things being equal[1], you can address these costs as follows:
- Downgrading: Reallocate work from more expensive units to cheaper ones. So, the negotiation process moves from legal to the documentation unit, to operations.
- Relocation: move work to a lower cost jurisdiction where a like-for-like personnel are cheaper: moving document management from London to Birmingham, Belfast, Madrid, Krakow, Cape Town or Bangalore.
- Outsourcing: Contract work out to third party service providers who may manage their own resources in lowe rcost jurisdictions, but in any case can be switched on and off easily
Real estate
A square foot of office space in Bangalore is 75% chearper than one in London. So - if you have to have a personnel-heavy process then , all other things being equal, it makes sense to move it. Right?
- Downgrading won’t affect your real estate spend
- Relocation will (but don't forget the one-off costs of having to acquire new premises)
- Outsourcing will (but you will pay for this through your service fee; but the ouytsourcer is incentivised to locate itself in the cheapest possible place).
Systems
Systems permitting communication and collaboration between the Personnel involved in a negotiation is a fixed cost (in that is not so much a function of time). But not the costs here increase where you are relocating or outsourcing parts of the workflow.
Consumables
Ink, paper, pens, yellow stickies. In the scheme of things de-minimis, but you’d nonetheless be horrified at the total cost. Does technology obviate some of these issues, or amplify them? It's the technology paradox.
See also
- ↑ The fungibility of personnel is a popular falsehood of management consultancy.