• Decoding Quality Management Systems
1RF8NS1
1RF8NS1
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
<strong>•</strong> Cognizant 20-20 Insights<br />
<strong>Decoding</strong> <strong>Quality</strong> <strong>Management</strong> <strong>Systems</strong><br />
<strong>Quality</strong> defines the character of any product or process. To better<br />
manage and extend brand reputation, organizations need a holistic,<br />
long-term view of enterprise quality management systems to tamp<br />
down costs and drive profitable growth by keeping customers loyal<br />
and satisfied.<br />
Executive Summary<br />
Whether building a new product or improving<br />
processes or services, quality is the bedrock of<br />
an organization’s long-term success. In fact, quality<br />
increasingly defines the brand. Consider that<br />
of the estimated 250,000-plus new products<br />
launched annually, between 85% and 95% fail; 1<br />
clearly, to build a successful brand, companies<br />
must make the most of the 5% to 15% of products<br />
that gain market acceptance — tough odds,<br />
indeed, for building a winning business.<br />
Although multiple factors can cause product failure,<br />
quality is considered by most experts to be<br />
among the leading contributors. And if or when<br />
products fail, companies need to understand<br />
the role that quality played and and calculate<br />
the resulting cost to their reputation and brand<br />
image. Building in quality from the get-go is critical<br />
to market success and is typically attained<br />
by deploying quality management system (QMS)<br />
applications that help to continually improve process<br />
efficiency and effectiveness to drive high<br />
performance.<br />
This white paper offers insights into the QMS landscape,<br />
highlights challenges of selecting the right<br />
solution and partner, details leadership dilemmas,<br />
and provides sound advice on how to make quality<br />
job one across the enterprise.<br />
A QMS Primer<br />
Several factors — including an ever-evolving<br />
product manufacturing landscape, internal organizational<br />
challenges and a dynamic global<br />
business climate — are driving organizations<br />
across industries to transform product and process<br />
quality, as well as keep closer tabs on supplier<br />
quality (see Figure 1, next page). Market pressures<br />
remain intense, both in heavily regulated industries,<br />
such as life sciences, medical devices and<br />
food and beverage, as well as in industries such as<br />
automotive and industrial manufacturing.<br />
These pressures are driving organizations to<br />
strive for the highest level of quality in all aspects<br />
of their operations. However, they must overcome<br />
many challenges along the way to achieving that<br />
goal, as well as strong cost competitiveness and<br />
rapid speed of delivery.<br />
cognizant 20-20 insights | october 2015
Forces Driving Product and<br />
Process <strong>Quality</strong><br />
Evolving Industry<br />
Landscape<br />
Globalization<br />
Resource availability<br />
Changing customers<br />
Continued drive for value<br />
Government regulations/<br />
activism<br />
Internal Challenges<br />
Need to address evolving<br />
specifications & protocols<br />
Global alignment on quality<br />
Data management issues<br />
Recalls<br />
Compliance challenges<br />
Claims challenges<br />
Business Climate<br />
Increased competition<br />
Value war<br />
Complex portfolio<br />
Increased global opportunities<br />
External failures<br />
Figure 1<br />
In the manufacturing world, QMS applications<br />
provide the foundation for enforcing quality<br />
policy and processes across the extended enterprise.<br />
Organizations often approach QMS as a<br />
means to not only meet regulatory and compliance<br />
requirements but also better manage and<br />
achieve operational goals, such as enhanced<br />
product quality, continuous business efficiency<br />
and accelerated time-to-market. QMS maturity<br />
plays a significant role in enhancing shopfloor<br />
manufacturing operations, product and process<br />
quality performance, and overall organizational<br />
performance.<br />
Figure 2 illustrates the role of QMS across the<br />
value chain, revealing how these systems touch<br />
every functional area, from product planning<br />
and definition to customer engagement. It also<br />
highlights how QMS addresses key quality areas,<br />
including advanced product quality planning<br />
(APQP), statistical process control (SPC), audit,<br />
corrective action and preventive action (CAPA),<br />
non-conformance (NC), customer complaints and<br />
regulatory compliance.<br />
Role of QMS across the Value Chain<br />
Plan and<br />
Define<br />
Research and<br />
Development<br />
Process Design<br />
and Development<br />
Product and<br />
Process Validation<br />
Production/<br />
Manufacturing/Assembly<br />
and Packaging<br />
Warehousing<br />
and Distribution<br />
Customer<br />
QMS Touchpoints<br />
<strong>Quality</strong> policy<br />
Document<br />
management<br />
Risk management<br />
<strong>Quality</strong> by design<br />
Good laboratory<br />
practice<br />
AQL checks/<br />
in-process checks<br />
Manufacturing<br />
scale-up<br />
Supplier selection<br />
BoM and process<br />
flow<br />
APQP/PPAP<br />
Supplier quality<br />
Audit management<br />
Change control<br />
Inspection and calibration<br />
Statistical process control<br />
Product traceability<br />
Non-conformance/<br />
deviation handling<br />
CAPA/CAR/SCAR<br />
<strong>Quality</strong> of service<br />
Compliance specifics<br />
Customer complaints<br />
Figure 2<br />
cognizant 20-20 insights 2
<strong>Quality</strong> Process and<br />
Application Challenges<br />
At many organizations, quality is looked upon as<br />
a separate department rather than as a shared<br />
responsibility; as a result, it is often addressed in<br />
a reactive and inefficient manner. In these cases,<br />
quality remains a “just fix the issue” concern<br />
rather than an investment in sustaining competitiveness.<br />
However, winning organizations have<br />
demonstrated that continued outperformance<br />
requires a collective effort, in which every individual<br />
who is part of the quality process shares<br />
responsibility for meeting customer requirements.<br />
Most manufacturers lack an integrated view on<br />
quality or a consensus on which functions to<br />
centralize, source, localize or share across the<br />
enterprise. Most also lack enterprise-wide governance;<br />
instead, each business unit has its own<br />
mandate for budgeting and prioritizing quality. To<br />
coordinate quality across the enterprise, senior<br />
management must tap an executive with direct<br />
responsibility for quality improvements within all<br />
functional areas of the organization.<br />
<strong>Quality</strong> processes — whose values are interconnected<br />
and correlated — must be integrated to<br />
fully leverage the data capabilities of applications<br />
that manage quality. An integrated view establishes<br />
a culture of collaboration across functional<br />
groups; for example, a production part approval<br />
process (PPAP) requires close collaboration not<br />
only between the purchasing and quality functions<br />
but also with the external supplier.<br />
Organizations have built a complex set of disparate<br />
applications over the years to manage<br />
enterprise-wide quality processes. These siloed<br />
applications — including homegrown applications,<br />
spreadsheets, point solutions and applications<br />
based on outdated technology — are often not<br />
integrated with one another and lack broader<br />
functional capabilities to support the business.<br />
Most of these applications are also heavily customized<br />
and are non-intuitive; moreover, the same<br />
application is often used differently across various<br />
business units and geographies, and different<br />
applications are sometimes used for the same<br />
process to address internal and external quality.<br />
There is no single dominant application, and<br />
little or no integration among applications. This<br />
fragmentation, incompleteness and lack of consistency<br />
have resulted in operational inefficiencies,<br />
increased cost and end-user dissatisfaction.<br />
Further complicating matters, multiple applications<br />
are often required to manage closely linked<br />
areas such as audit management, non-conformance<br />
(NC) handling and corrective action and<br />
With the emergence of millennial<br />
workers, the relevance and<br />
effectiveness of addressing<br />
quality issues now requires<br />
organizations to meet a fast-rising<br />
and accelerating benchmark for<br />
minimum digital competency. This<br />
includes adopting an enterprise<br />
QMS, made possible by the new<br />
digital-centric world.<br />
preventive action (CAPA). This forces users to<br />
manually manage the linkage between an audit<br />
finding and its respective CAPA.<br />
Organizations wrestling with the complexity of<br />
duplicate quality functionality and processes<br />
across legacy systems usually attempt to simplify<br />
and consolidate applications into standardized<br />
platforms that help eliminate unnecessary costs,<br />
as well as position enterprise QMS as a strategic<br />
business capability for the future.<br />
With the emergence of millennial workers —<br />
tech-savvy, mobile-centric, socially-networked<br />
employees who will dominate the workforce by<br />
the end of this decade — the relevance and effectiveness<br />
of addressing quality issues now requires<br />
organizations to meet a fast-rising and accelerating<br />
benchmark for minimum digital competency.<br />
This includes adopting an enterprise QMS, made<br />
possible by the new digital-centric world.<br />
cognizant 20-20 insights 3
Selecting a QMS: An Executive<br />
Determination<br />
With minimal data or experience, business leaders<br />
need to evaluate if or how a QMS they are considering<br />
delivers the following capabilities:<br />
<strong>•</strong> Greater visibility and escalation of operational<br />
quality issues.<br />
<strong>•</strong> The ability to address potentially risky operational<br />
trends.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Adaptation to regulatory changes and corresponding<br />
business initiatives.<br />
<strong>•</strong> The ability to impact quality procedures across<br />
business units or operating sites.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Coordination of quality control across suppliers<br />
and extended partners.<br />
A QMS investment requires a systematized program<br />
approach to scoping, implementation and<br />
management across system lifecycles. The following<br />
factors should also be considered:<br />
<strong>•</strong> The ability to bridge process gaps.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Simplification of the existing technology<br />
landscape and adoption of newer technology.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Effort vs. benefits.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Sunk investments.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Growth strategy and business objectives.<br />
Based on these factors, business leaders should<br />
identify quality improvement opportunities by<br />
assessing current process and application gaps.<br />
The decision to grasp these opportunities and<br />
commit to a future course must be viewed in light<br />
of practical constraints, current and future needs,<br />
business continuity and the ability of the organization<br />
to handle change.<br />
The future course of action can be determined<br />
by evaluating several possible hypotheses (see<br />
Figure 3).<br />
Key Factors Impacting QMS Hypotheses<br />
The selected hypotheses will directly impact the<br />
key considerations outlined above. In Figure 3,<br />
Hypothesis 4 will have maximum impact on these<br />
key factors and will offer the greatest level of benefits<br />
with respect to the effort required. Meanwhile,<br />
Hypothesis 1 and 2 will involve sunk costs for customization<br />
or future upgrades to maintain the<br />
systems or applications. While Hypothesis 1 offers<br />
fewer long-term benefits, Hypothesis 3 helps close<br />
the process gap through out-of-the-box (OOTB)<br />
functionality; it does not, however, deliver greater<br />
Evaluating QMS Investments<br />
Hypotheses<br />
Outcomes<br />
Process Gaps<br />
Minimal Change Reengineer<br />
<strong>•</strong> Leverage additional<br />
features of current<br />
systems.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Harmonize processes and systems.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Integrate current<br />
systems with<br />
necessary process<br />
changes.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Continue with current<br />
system. Build a custom<br />
integration tool<br />
to extract information from<br />
other systems.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Retain current<br />
process<br />
definitions.<br />
2 4<br />
<strong>•</strong> Invest in new<br />
“best-in-class” enterprise<br />
QMS with significant<br />
process improvements<br />
for all dimensions.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Introduce new<br />
functionalities as and<br />
when required in QMS.<br />
1 3<br />
<strong>•</strong> Use recent QMS<br />
solutions and retain<br />
current process<br />
definitions.<br />
Process<br />
Minimal Change Reengineer<br />
2<br />
<strong>•</strong> Huge effort required to<br />
build integration tool for<br />
disparate systems.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Possibility of continued process<br />
and system mismatch.<br />
<strong>•</strong> User acceptance<br />
likely to be<br />
questionable.<br />
1<br />
<strong>•</strong> Huge effort required to<br />
build integration tool<br />
for disparate systems.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Possibility of continued system<br />
and process complexity.<br />
<strong>•</strong> May involve further<br />
customization.<br />
4<br />
4<br />
<strong>•</strong> QMS covering multiple<br />
dimensions provides an<br />
integrated quality environment.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Significant process<br />
improvements, leading<br />
to key business benefits.<br />
<strong>•</strong> User acceptance<br />
likely to be high.<br />
3<br />
<strong>•</strong> New solutions cover<br />
only partial functionality,<br />
requiring continued existence e<br />
of some functional silos.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Process complexity might<br />
decrease due to system<br />
enablers.<br />
<strong>•</strong>User acceptance likely to be mixed.<br />
Existing<br />
<strong>Systems</strong> Gaps<br />
New<br />
Existing<br />
<strong>Systems</strong><br />
New<br />
Figure 3<br />
cognizant 20-20 insights 4
Hypotheses Assessment: Evaluating Potential Outcomes<br />
Factors Hypothesis 1 Hypothesis 2 Hypothesis 3 Hypothesis 4<br />
Solution capability to bridge<br />
process gaps (through OOTB<br />
or minimal customization)<br />
√<br />
√<br />
Simplification of technology<br />
landscape<br />
√<br />
Effort vs. benefits<br />
√<br />
Low benefit<br />
√<br />
High benefit<br />
Sunk investments<br />
√<br />
Current system<br />
with customization<br />
√<br />
Current system with<br />
future upgrades<br />
Growth strategy and<br />
business objectives<br />
!<br />
Depends on<br />
adoption level<br />
√<br />
√<br />
Figure 4<br />
benefits than Hypothesis 4, and it provides little<br />
long-term flexibility. The results of all four hypotheses<br />
are summarized in Figure 4.<br />
Evaluating QMS Applications<br />
Because enterprise QMS centralizes various functions<br />
(i.e., audit management, NC handling, etc.),<br />
it can help improve quality management across<br />
geographies and divisions through process standardization<br />
and automation. It creates a single<br />
platform for cross-functional communications<br />
and collaboration that synchronizes and ingrains<br />
quality across the value chain.<br />
Organizations are revisiting their quality strategies<br />
and are in the early stages of centralizing the<br />
quality function. QMS providers are beginning to<br />
adopt elements of social networking, real-time<br />
analytics and mobility, and are also working on<br />
their next generation of products, as a result of:<br />
<strong>•</strong> Cloud-based technology, which has the<br />
potential to drastically reduce costs.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Modular platforms that can accelerate return<br />
on investment (ROI) before the full implementation<br />
is completed.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Digital transformation.<br />
Multiple niche and stand-alone players offer QMS,<br />
as well as enterprise system vendors that are<br />
incorporating QMS into enterprise resource planning<br />
(ERP), product lifecycle management (PLM)<br />
and manufacturing execution system (MES) applications<br />
suites.<br />
Where QMS Fits in the Manufacturing Value Chain and Technology Landscape<br />
Plan and<br />
Define<br />
Research and<br />
Development<br />
Process Design and<br />
Development<br />
PLM<br />
Product and<br />
Process Validation<br />
Production/<br />
Manufacturing/Assembly<br />
and Packaging<br />
Warehousing<br />
and Distribution<br />
Customer<br />
ERP<br />
MES<br />
CRM<br />
CRM<br />
QMS for R&D and Product Development<br />
QMS for Manufacturing and Distribution<br />
Figure 5<br />
cognizant 20-20 insights<br />
5
To choose the right approach, organizations need<br />
to understand the QMS landscape and their own<br />
specific needs.<br />
<strong>•</strong> PLM-based QMS is advantageous when PLM<br />
investments have already been made. Generally,<br />
PLM-based QMS is best for organizations<br />
that engineer complex products with a focus on<br />
time-to-market. PLM helps integrate the functions<br />
of quality from design through manufacturing<br />
by employing a lifecycle approach; this<br />
approach ensures that feedback from sources<br />
such as non-compliance and corrective actions<br />
is routed to engineering to help address quality<br />
issues. PLM couples model-based development<br />
and simulations, helping organizations<br />
to better leverage visualization and variation<br />
analyses that greatly impact quality, as well as<br />
reduce cost of quality (compared with physical<br />
prototypes). In this scenario, a separate QMS<br />
must be tightly integrated to leverage these<br />
benefits.<br />
<strong>•</strong> ERP-based QMS makes sense if the organization<br />
is in the middle of an ERP deployment.<br />
Among the primary benefits of ERP-based QMS<br />
is the use of a single platform, which reduces<br />
the need for multiple systems and costly integration.<br />
For large organizations, an ERP-based<br />
QMS is usually included as part of the broader<br />
ERP deployment.<br />
<strong>•</strong> MES-based QMS is best suited for an organization<br />
that is highly focused on manufacturing,<br />
has already established operational excellence,<br />
has a continuous improvement group seeking<br />
to enhance quality processes and manufacturing<br />
performance, and has harmonized quality<br />
processes. Many MES vendors include complementary<br />
QMS functionalities within their<br />
solution sets.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Best-of-breed QMS applications provided by<br />
niche players typically represent the unique<br />
quality needs of a manufacturing organization.<br />
Their solutions generally offer reduced time-tovalue,<br />
lower costs and high flexibility compared<br />
with dedicated PLM and ERP systems.<br />
Business executives need to evaluate the advantages<br />
and disadvantages associated with the<br />
various solution types from a long-term strategic<br />
standpoint to make a business case and forecast<br />
the impact of the QMS build-vs.-buy decision.<br />
Application types can be classified as point and<br />
enterprise applications.<br />
Point applications are typically offered as customized<br />
off-the-shelf (COTS) or OOTB and are<br />
implemented to address a particular need, such<br />
as production part approval process (PPAP) or<br />
audit management; they address an immediate<br />
problem within a functional area of the organization.<br />
Enterprise applications, on the other hand,<br />
address the needs of the organization across<br />
departments and functions, and include more<br />
than one solution. They are scalable, configurable<br />
and flexible enough to address future QMS needs.<br />
Selecting a Best-Fit Enterprise QMS<br />
Common challenges that organizations face when<br />
deciding on a QMS include:<br />
<strong>•</strong> Making the fundamental design choices<br />
required to get the entire QMS challenge right.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Keeping QMS lean, simple and agile so that the<br />
right information gets to the right employees<br />
at the right time.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Ensuring the QMS fully meets regulatory<br />
requirements and reduces compliance concerns.<br />
When selecting an application, organizations<br />
need to begin with a long-term vision of their QMS<br />
strategy. In the short term, a point application<br />
often seems to be the most viable, cost-effective<br />
option; however, organizations with a long-term<br />
quality vision need to ensure that the solution will<br />
evolve to meet their needs as they grow.<br />
When selecting an application,<br />
organizations need to begin<br />
with a long-term vision of<br />
their QMS strategy.<br />
Over time, organizations typically invest in multiple<br />
point applications; however, the associated<br />
costs (maintenance and support, training, licensing,<br />
etc.) are often greater than expected due to<br />
needed customizations. Eventually, organizations<br />
move to an enterprise-wide application, undercognizant<br />
20-20 insights 6
mining the time, effort and investment in the<br />
point solution. When making their application<br />
selection, organizations should weigh the following<br />
parameters:<br />
<strong>•</strong> Functionality.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Industry fit.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Ability to integrate with the organization’s<br />
internal systems, as well as those of its<br />
customers, partners and suppliers.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Scalability and flexibility.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Software pricing/licensing model.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Vendor’s ability to provide service and support<br />
across geographies.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Ease of use.<br />
Moving Forward<br />
In today’s digital world, it is increasingly<br />
important for business leaders to assess and<br />
understand the potential for a QMS initiative<br />
to enhance sustainable competitive advantage<br />
and profitable growth. Effective QMS programs<br />
build and support quality policies and processes<br />
across organizational functions to not only fulfill<br />
the company’s quality vision but also enable the<br />
enterprise to be future-ready.<br />
The success of the quality initiative to adopt<br />
and implement an enterprise QMS requires the<br />
unwavering commitment and dedicated support<br />
of executive leadership. Evaluation conclusions<br />
need to be supported by evidence and assessed<br />
against criteria or standards agreed upon by business<br />
executives. Justifying a decision involves the<br />
following steps:<br />
Business Objectives for QMS<br />
Develop a flexible,<br />
industry-leading QMS<br />
solution to support<br />
accelerated growth.<br />
Strengthen QMS implementation<br />
advantage across all business<br />
units and geographies.<br />
Figure 6<br />
Leverage technology<br />
as a competitive<br />
advantage.<br />
Deliver efficient QMS<br />
solution that enables<br />
organizations to win.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Analysis of an evaluation’s findings and<br />
synthesis of various sources of information to<br />
reach a deeper understanding.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Interpretation of the findings to convey<br />
evidence in relevant ways that leadership can<br />
truly appreciate.<br />
<strong>•</strong> A comparison of investigative findings and<br />
interpretations with agreed-upon criteria and<br />
standards.<br />
Footnotes<br />
1 “The Most Memorable Product Launches of 2010,” Forbes, http://www.forbes.com/2010/12/03/mostmemorable-products-leadership-cmo-network.html.<br />
References<br />
<strong>•</strong> Peter De Boeck, Ulrich Huber, Kasper Jahn, Henrik Jørck Nielsen, “Reinventing the QMS: Adding<br />
Agility and Robustness to Control and Compliance,” McKinsey & Co., 2014.<br />
<strong>•</strong> “Beyond Compliance: The Strategic Role of <strong>Quality</strong> <strong>Management</strong> <strong>Systems</strong>,” Forrester Research, Inc.<br />
<strong>•</strong> Joan Schneider and Julie Hall, “Why Most Product Launches Fail,” Harvard Business Review,<br />
April 2011, https://hbr.org/2011/04/why-most-product-launches-fail.<br />
cognizant 20-20 insights 7
About the Authors<br />
Amit Joshi is a Consulting Senior Manager within Cognizant Business Consulting’s Engineering and<br />
Manufacturing Practice. He has over a decade of experience in operations and consulting with manufacturing<br />
companies. Amit holds an M.B.A. from IIM, Calcutta, and a bachelor’s in technology from NIT,<br />
Kurukshetra. He can be reached at Amit.Joshi2@cognizant.com.<br />
Kalpesh Agarwal is a Consulting Manager within Cognizant Business Consulting’s Engineering and<br />
Manufacturing Practice. He has over a decade of experience in operations and consulting for manufacturing<br />
companies. Kalpesh holds an M.B.A. from SP Jain, Mumbai, and a master’s in food technology. He<br />
can be reached at Kalpesh.Agarwal@cognizant.com.<br />
Hardik Kansupada is a Director within Cognizant Business Consulting’s Engineering and Manufacturing<br />
Practice. He has over 18 years of experience in leading and managing strategic engagements, working<br />
with C-level executives and end users. Hardik has a master’s in computer information systems from the<br />
University of Houston. He can be reached at Hardik.Kansupada@cognizant.com.<br />
About Cognizant<br />
Cognizant (NASDAQ: CTSH) is a leading provider of information technology, consulting, and business<br />
process outsourcing services, dedicated to helping the world’s leading companies build stronger businesses.<br />
Headquartered in Teaneck, New Jersey (U.S.), Cognizant combines a passion for client satisfaction,<br />
technology innovation, deep industry and business process expertise, and a global, collaborative<br />
workforce that embodies the future of work. With over 100 development and delivery centers worldwide<br />
and approximately 218,000 employees as of June 30, 2015, Cognizant is a member of the NASDAQ-100,<br />
the S&P 500, the Forbes Global 2000, and the Fortune 500 and is ranked among the top performing and<br />
fastest growing companies in the world. Visit us online at www.cognizant.com or follow us on Twitter: Cognizant.<br />
World Headquarters<br />
500 Frank W. Burr Blvd.<br />
Teaneck, NJ 07666 USA<br />
Phone: +1 201 801 0233<br />
Fax: +1 201 801 0243<br />
Toll Free: +1 888 937 3277<br />
Email: inquiry@cognizant.com<br />
European Headquarters<br />
1 Kingdom Street<br />
Paddington Central<br />
London W2 6BD<br />
Phone: +44 (0) 20 7297 7600<br />
Fax: +44 (0) 20 7121 0102<br />
Email: infouk@cognizant.com<br />
India Operations Headquarters<br />
#5/535, Old Mahabalipuram Road<br />
Okkiyam Pettai, Thoraipakkam<br />
Chennai, 600 096 India<br />
Phone: +91 (0) 44 4209 6000<br />
Fax: +91 (0) 44 4209 6060<br />
Email: inquiryindia@cognizant.com<br />
© Copyright 2015, Cognizant. All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted in any form or by any<br />
means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the express written permission from Cognizant. The information contained herein is<br />
subject to change without notice. All other trademarks mentioned herein are the property of their respective owners. TL Codex 1460