of 3 - Center for Global Outsourcings

H7: IS vendor’s partnership quality is positively related to its strategic performance.
H8: IS vendor’s partnership quality is positively related to satisfaction.
H9: IS vendor’s service quality is positively related to satisfaction.
H10: IT Vendor’s deliverable quality is positively related to its strategic performance.
METHODOLOGY
Measures
Survey data from outsourcing vendors in Indian and China were used to test our research model and
hypotheses. Relationship management capability was measured using three items that were adapted
from the works of Lee and Kim (1999), Holmström et al. (2006) and Kumar and Palvia (2002). Contract
management capability was measured using two items that were adapted from the works of Richmond &
Seidman (1993), Kumar and Palvia (2002) and Poppo and Lacity (2006). IT management capability was
measured using four items that were developed based on the concepts suggested by Bharadwaj (2000),
Swinarski, et al. (2006) and Subramani (2004). Partnership quality was measured using four items that
were developed based on the work of Lee and Kim (1999), Lee (2001), and Grover et al. (1996). Service
quality was measured using six items that were adapted from the SERVQUAL items developed by
Parasuraman et al. (1988) and from Lee and Kim (1999). Deliverable quality was measured using three
items that were adapted from the works of Paulk et al. (1993), Lee and Kim (1993), Holmström et al.
(2006); and Kumar and Palvia (2002). The dependent variables were measured using the
outsourcing/offshoring success scales developed by Grover et al. (1996), Levina and Ross (2003) and
Lee and Kim (1999). All items were assessed using a seven-point Likert-type scale. Regarding critical
issues, after pretesting with professional colleagues, the instrument included a total of 21 issues as
shown in Table 1.
Table 1. The Critical Issues Instrument
Issue Description
1. Lack of communication with the client during critical phases of designing the processes.
2. Gathering data to make a compelling proposal to the client.
3. Availability of experts on the client’s processes (or systems) during knowledge transfer.
4. Attrition of our company’s staff by the client before completion of knowledge transfer.
5. Lack of documentation of client’s existing processes (or systems).
6. Unclear communication channels with the client.
7. Reaching agreement with the client on the ROI (Return on Investment).
8. Lack of involvement from the client’s top management team.
9. Attrition of the client staff before completion of knowledge transfer.
10. Poorly designed network infrastructure at our own offshore site.
11. Client’s readiness to reengineer process before outsourcing.
12. Unclear roles and responsibilities of the client’s employees.
13. Legal and regulatory concerns.
14. Resistance from client’s employees to outsourcing.
15. Client’s short term objective focused only on cost savings (rather than long-term benefits).
16. Inadequate staffing at the client end.
17. Poorly designed network infrastructure at the client site.
18. Language differences between our employees and the client’s employees.
19. Time differences between our country and the client’s country.
20. Organizational culture differences between our company and the client.
21. National culture differences between our country and the client’s country.
Tenth Annual International Daejeon, South Korea P a g e | 69
Smart Sourcing Conference June 28-29, 2012