Research Paper代写范文：The Strategic Rationale For Outsourcing Decisions
Research Paper代写范文-外包决策的战略依据。本文是一篇本站提供的research paper代写参考范文，主要内容是将投资和精力集中在企业最好的工作上，从而扩大内部资源的回报。其次，如果核心竞争力发展良好，一家公司可以为目前和即将到来的竞争对手提供惊人的障碍，这些竞争对手希望进入公司感兴趣的领域，从而帮助和保护“市场份额”的战略优势。第三，可以想象，最大的杠杆作用是全面部署外部承包商、投资、创新和专业能力，这些能力是无法负担的，甚至不可能在内部复制。第四，在快速变化的市场和技术环境中，这种合作战略降低了风险，缩短发现和制造周期，减少投资，并更好地响应客户需求。下面就一起来看一下这篇research paper代写范文的具体内容。
By reviewing the relative and risks of “making or buying”, firms can persuade their expertise and resources for improved profitability. Combining two strategic approaches accurately permit managers to coordinate their companies’ skills and resources efficiently beyond levels obtainable with other strategies.
通过审查“制造或购买”的相对性和风险，企业可以说服他们的专业知识和资源来提高盈利能力。将两种战略方法准确地结合起来，可以使管理者有效地协调公司的技能和资源，超越其他战略所能达到的水平。
1- Concentrate company’s possessed resources on its “core competencies” through which the company can achieve definable incomparability and offer “unique value” for customers. (Quinn, and Doorley, 1990)
1-将公司拥有的资源集中在其“核心能力”上，通过这些能力，公司可以实现可定义的不可比性，并为客户提供“独特的价值”。（Quinn和Doorley，1990）
2- Outsourcing strategically other activities of the companies – consisting of many conventionally believed primary to a company – which are neither special capabilities the firm nor affect critical strategic requirements. (Quinn, 1992)
2-战略性地外包公司的其他活动——包括许多传统上认为是公司的主要活动——这些活动既不是公司的特殊能力，也不会影响关键的战略要求。（奎因，1992年）
Substantial gains can be achieved from effective combining of the two approaches. Directors leverage their firm’s resources in four manners.
将这两种方法有效结合起来可以取得实质性成果。董事们通过四种方式利用公司的资源。
First, they expand returns on in-house resources by focusing investments and energies on the enterprise’s best jobs. Secondly, if core competencies are well-developed a company can supply astounding barriers for present and forthcoming competitors that look for entering into the company’s areas of interest, thus assisting and shielding the strategic advantages of “market share”. Third, conceivably the utmost leverage of all is the full deployment of external contractors, investments, innovations, and specialized professional capabilities that would be unaffordable or even not possible to replicate internally Fourth, in rapidly shifting marketplaces and technological circumstances, this cooperative strategy reduces risks, shortens discovery and manufacturing cycle times, decrease investments, and generates better responsiveness to customer needs. (Quinn and Hillmer 1995)
首先，他们将投资和精力集中在企业最好的工作上，从而扩大内部资源的回报。其次，如果核心竞争力发展良好，一家公司可以为目前和即将到来的竞争对手提供惊人的障碍，这些竞争对手希望进入公司感兴趣的领域，从而帮助和保护“市场份额”的战略优势。第三，可以想象，最大的杠杆作用是全面部署外部承包商、投资、创新和专业能力，这些能力是无法负担的，甚至不可能在内部复制。第四，在快速变化的市场和技术环境中，这种合作战略降低了风险，缩短发现和制造周期，减少投资，并更好地响应客户需求。（Quinn和Hillmer 1995）
Earning sustainable competitive advantage through Outsourcing 通过外包获得可持续的竞争优势
Managers can combine core competency concepts and strategic outsourcing for maximum effectiveness. Managers can analytically select and develop the core competencies that will provide the firm’s uniqueness, competitive advantage, and basis of value creation for the future.
管理者可以将核心能力概念与战略外包相结合，以实现最大的效率。管理者可以通过分析来选择和发展核心能力，这些能力将为公司的独特性、竞争优势和未来价值创造奠定基础。
Core competency strategies 核心能力战略
The basic ideas behind core competencies and strategic outsourcing have been well supported by research extending over a twenty-year period.[4] In 1974, Rumelt noted that neither of the then-favored strategies – unrelated diversification or vertical integration – yielded consistently high returns.[5] Since then, other carefully structured research has indicated the effectiveness of disaggregation strategies in many industries.[6] Noting the failures of many conglomerates in the 1960s and 1970s, both financial theorists and investors began to support more focused company concepts. Generally this meant “sticking to your knitting” by cutting back to fewer product lines. Unfortunately, this also meant a concomitant increase in the systematic risk these narrower markets represented.
核心竞争力和战略外包背后的基本思想得到了长达二十年的研究的有力支持。[4] 1974年，Rumelt指出，当时青睐的两种策略——无关的多元化或垂直整合——都没有产生持续的高回报。[5] 从那时起，其他精心组织的研究表明，分解战略在许多行业中是有效的。[6] 注意到20世纪60年代和70年代许多企业集团的失败，金融理论家和投资者都开始支持更专注的公司概念。一般来说，这意味着通过减少生产线来“坚持编织”。不幸的是，这也意味着这些狭窄市场所代表的系统性风险随之增加。
However, some analysts noticed that many highly successful Japanese and American companies had very wide product lines, yet were neither conglomerates nor truly vertically integrated.[7] Japanese companies, like Sony, Mitsubishi, Matsushita, or Yamaha, had extremely diverse product offerings, as did 3M or Hewlett-Packard in the United States. Yet they were not conglomerates in the normal sense. They were termed “related conglomerates,” redeploying certain key skills from market to market.[8]
然而，一些分析师注意到，许多非常成功的日本和美国公司拥有非常广泛的产品线，但既不是企业集团，也不是真正的垂直整合。[7] 索尼、三菱、松下或雅马哈等日本公司的产品种类极其多样，美国的3M或惠普也是如此。然而，它们并不是正常意义上的企业集团。它们被称为“相关企业集团”，将某些关键技能从一个市场重新部署到另一个市场。[8]
At the same time, these companies also contracted out significant support activities. Although frequently considered vertically integrated, the Japanese auto Industry, for example, was structured around “mother companies” that primarily performed design and assembly, with a number of Independent suppliers and alliance partners – without ownership bonds to the mother companies – feeding into them.[9] Many other Japanese hi-tech companies, particularly the more Innovative ones like Sony and Honda, used comparable strategies leveraging a few core skills against multiple markets through extensive outsourcing.
与此同时，这些公司还承包了重要的支助活动。尽管经常被认为是垂直整合的，但例如，日本汽车行业是围绕着主要从事设计和组装的“母公司”构建的，有许多独立供应商和联盟合作伙伴——与母公司没有所有权纽带——为其提供服务。[9] 许多其他日本高科技公司，特别是索尼和本田等更具创新性的公司，通过广泛的外包，利用一些核心技能对抗多个市场，采用了类似的战略。
The term “core competency strategies” was later used to describe these and other less diversified strategies developed around a central set of corporate skills.[10] However, there has been little theory or consistency in the literature about what “core” really means. Consequently, many executives have been understandably confused about the topic. They need not be if they think in terms of the specific skills the company has or must have to create unique value for customers. However, their analyses must go well beyond looking at traditional product or functional strategies to the fundamentals of what the company can do better than anyone else.[11]
“核心能力战略”一词后来被用来描述这些和其他围绕一套核心企业技能发展的不太多样化的战略。[10] 然而，关于“核心”的真正含义，文献中几乎没有理论或一致性。因此，许多高管对这个话题感到困惑是可以理解的。如果他们从公司为客户创造独特价值所具备或必须具备的特定技能来思考，那么他们就不需要这样做。然而，他们的分析必须远远超出传统的产品或功能战略，而是公司比任何人都能做得更好的基本面。[11]
For example, after some difficult times, it was easy enough for a beer company like Foster’s to decide that it should not be in the finance, forest products, and pastoral businesses into which it had diversified. It has now divested these peripheral businesses and is concentrating on beer. However, even within this concept, Foster’s true competencies are in brewing and marketing beer. Many of its distribution, transportation, and can production activities, for example, might actually be more effectively contracted out. Within individual functions like production, Foster’s could further extend its competitive advantage by outsourcing selected activities – such as maintenance or computing – where it has no unique capabilities.
例如，在经历了一些困难时期后，像福斯特这样的啤酒公司很容易决定不从事其多元化经营的金融、森林产品和牧业。它现在已经剥离了这些外围业务，并专注于啤酒业务。然而，即使在这个概念中，福斯特的真正能力也是酿造和营销啤酒。例如，它的许多分销、运输和罐头生产活动实际上可能更有效地外包出去。在生产等单个功能中，Foster’s可以通过外包选定的活动（如维护或计算）来进一步扩大其竞争优势，而这些活动并没有其独特的能力。
The essence of core competencies
核心竞争力的本质
What then is really “core”? And why@ The concept requires that managers think much more carefully about which of the firm’s activities really do – or could – create unique value and which activities managers could more effectively buy externally. Careful study of both successful and unsuccessful corporate examples suggests that effective core competencies are:
那么什么才是真正的“核心”呢？为什么@这一概念要求管理者更仔细地思考公司的哪些活动真正能够或可能创造独特的价值，以及管理者可以更有效地从外部购买哪些活动。仔细研究成功和不成功的企业例子表明，有效的核心竞争力是：
1. Skill or knowledge sets, not products or functions. Executives need to look beyond the company’s products to the intellectual skills or management systems that actually create a maintainable competitive edge. Products, even those with valuable legal protection, can be too easily back-engineered, duplicated, or replaced by substitutes. Nor is a competency typically one of the traditional functions such as production, engineering sales, or finance, around which organizations were formed in the past. Instead, competencies tend to be sets of skills that cut across traditional functions.
1.技能或知识集，而非产品或功能。高管们需要超越公司的产品，着眼于真正创造可维持竞争优势的智力技能或管理系统。产品，即使是那些有宝贵法律保护的产品，也很容易被重新设计、复制或被替代品取代。能力也不是过去组织所围绕的传统职能之一，如生产、工程销售或财务。相反，能力往往是跨越传统职能的一系列技能。
This interaction allows the organization consistently to perform an activity better than functional competitors and continually to Improve on the activity as markets, technology, and competition evolve. Competencies thus involve activities such as product or service design, technology creation, customer service, or logistics that tend to be based on knowledge rather than on ownership of assets or intellectual property per se. Knowledge-based activities generate most of the value in services and manufacturing.
这种互动使组织能够始终如一地比职能竞争对手更好地执行活动，并随着市场、技术和竞争的发展不断改进活动。因此，能力涉及产品或服务设计、技术创造、客户服务或物流等活动，这些活动往往基于知识，而不是资产或知识产权本身的所有权。基于知识的活动产生了服务业和制造业的大部分价值。
In services, which account for 79 percent of all jobs and 76 percent of all value-added in the United States, intellectual inputs create virtually all of the value-added. Banking, financial services, advertising, consulting, accounting, retailing, wholesaling, education, entertainment, communications, and health care are clear examples. In manufacturing, knowledge-based activities – like R&D, product design, process design, logistics, marketing research, marketing, advertising, distribution, and customer service @ also dominate the value-added chain of most companies (see Exhibit 1).
在服务业，占美国所有就业岗位的79%和所有附加值的76%，智力投入几乎创造了所有的附加值。银行、金融服务、广告、咨询、会计、零售、批发、教育、娱乐、通信和医疗保健都是明显的例子。在制造业中，以知识为基础的活动，如研发、产品设计、工艺设计、物流、营销研究、营销、广告、分销和客户服务，也主导着大多数公司的增值链（见附件1）。
2. Flexible, long-term platforms – capable of adaptation or evolution. Too many companies try to focus on the narrow areas where they currently excel, usually on some product-oriented skills. The real challenge is to consciously build dominating skills in areas that the customer will continue to value over time, as Motorola is doing with Its focus on “superior quality, portable communications.” The uniqueness of Toys “R” Us lies in its powerful information and distribution systems for toys, and that of State Street Boston in its advanced information and management systems for large custodial accounts.
2.灵活、长期的平台——能够适应或进化。太多的公司试图专注于他们目前擅长的狭窄领域，通常是一些以产品为导向的技能。真正的挑战是有意识地在客户将随着时间的推移继续重视的领域建立主导技能，就像摩托罗拉专注于“卓越质量的便携式通信”所做的那样玩具反斗城的独特之处在于其强大的玩具信息和分销系统，而波士顿道富的独特之处则在于其先进的大型托管账户信息和管理系统。
Problems occur when managers choose to concentrate too narrowly on products (as computer companies did on hardware) or too inflexibly on formats and skills that no longer match customer needs (as FotoMat and numerous department stores did). Flexible skill sets and constant, conscious reassessment of trends are hallmarks of successful core competency strategies.
当经理们选择过于狭隘地专注于产品（就像计算机公司在硬件上所做的那样）或过于死板地专注于不再符合客户需求的格式和技能（就像FotoMat和许多百货公司所做的一样）时，就会出现问题。灵活的技能组合和对趋势的持续、有意识的重新评估是成功的核心能力战略的标志。
3. Limited in number. Most companies target two or three (not one and rarely more than five) activities in the value chain most critical to future success. For example, 3M concentrates on four critical technologies in great depth and supports these with a peerless innovation system. As work becomes more complex, and the opportunities to excel in many detailed activities proliferate, managers find they cannot be best at every activity in the value chain. As they go beyond three to five activities or skill sets, they are unable to match the performance of their more focused competitors or suppliers.
3.数量有限。大多数公司的目标是价值链中对未来成功最关键的两到三项（不是一项，很少超过五项）活动。例如，3M公司深入研究四项关键技术，并以无与伦比的创新体系为其提供支持。随着工作变得越来越复杂，在许多详细活动中脱颖而出的机会越来越多，管理者发现他们不可能在价值链中的每一项活动中都做到最好。当他们超过三到五项活动或技能时，他们无法与更专注的竞争对手或供应商的表现相匹配。
Each skill set requires intensity and management dedication that cannot tolerate dilution. It is hard to imagine Microsoft’s top managers taking their enthusiasm and skills in software into, say, chip design or even large-scale training in software usage. And if they did, what would be the cost of their loss of attention on software development?
每一项技能都需要强度和管理奉献精神，不能被稀释。很难想象微软的高层管理人员会把他们在软件方面的热情和技能投入到芯片设计甚至大规模的软件使用培训中。如果他们这样做了，他们对软件开发失去关注的代价是什么？
4. Unique sources of leverage in the value chain. Effective strategies seek out places where there are market imperfections or knowledge gaps that the company is uniquely qualified to fill and where investments in intellectual resources can be highly leveraged. Raychem and Intel concentrate on depth in design and on highly specialized test-feedback systems supporting carefully selected knowledge-based products – not on volume production of standardized products – to jump over the experience curve advantages of their larger competitors. Morgan Stanley, through its TAPS system, and Bear Stearns, through its integrated bond-trading programs, have developed in-depth knowledge bases creating unique intellectual advantages and profitability in their highly competitive markets.
4.价值链中独特的杠杆来源。有效的战略寻找存在市场缺陷或知识空白的地方，这些地方是公司唯一有资格填补的，并且可以高度利用对知识资源的投资。Raychem和Intel专注于深度设计和高度专业化的测试反馈系统，支持精心选择的基于知识的产品，而不是标准化产品的批量生产，以超越其大型竞争对手的经验曲线优势。摩根士丹利（Morgan Stanley）通过其TAPS系统和贝尔斯登（Bear Stearns）通过其综合债券交易计划，开发了深入的知识库，在竞争激烈的市场中创造了独特的智力优势和盈利能力。
5. Areas where the company can dominate. Companies consistently make more money than their competitors only if they can perform some activities – which are important to customers – more effectively than anyone else. True focus in strategy means the capacity to bring more power to bear on a selected sector than any competitor can. Once, this meant owning and managing all the elements in the value chain supporting a specific product or service in a selected market position. Today, however, some outside supplier, by specializing in the specific skills and technologies underlying a single element in the value chain, can become more proficient at that activity than virtually any company spreading its efforts over the whole value chain.
5.公司可以占据主导地位的领域。只有当公司能够比其他任何人更有效地开展一些对客户很重要的活动时，公司才能始终比竞争对手赚更多的钱。真正的战略重点意味着比任何竞争对手都更有能力为选定的行业带来更多的力量。曾经，这意味着在选定的市场地位上拥有和管理价值链中支持特定产品或服务的所有元素。然而，今天，一些外部供应商通过专门研究价值链中单个元素背后的特定技能和技术，可以比任何在整个价值链上努力的公司更精通这项活动。
In essence, each company is in competition with all potential suppliers of each activity in its value chain. Hence, it must benchmark its selected core competencies against all other potential suppliers of that activity and continue to build these core capabilities until it is demonstrably best. Thus the basic nature of strategic analysis changes from an industry analysis perspective to a horizontal analysis of capabilities across all potential providers of an activity, regardless of which industry the provider might be in.
从本质上讲，每家公司都在与其价值链中每项活动的所有潜在供应商竞争。因此，它必须将其选定的核心能力与该活动的所有其他潜在供应商进行比较，并继续建设这些核心能力，直到它明显达到最佳水平。因此，战略分析的基本性质从行业分析的角度转变为对活动的所有潜在提供者的能力的横向分析，无论提供者可能在哪个行业。
6. Elements important to customers in the long run. At least one of the firm’s core competencies should normally relate directly to understanding and serving its customers – that is, the right half of the value chain in Exhibit 1. Hi-tech companies with the world’s best state-of-the-art technology often fail when they ignore this caveat. On the other hand, Merck matches its superb basic research with a prescription drug marketing knowhow that is equally outstanding.
6.从长远来看，对客户很重要的因素。公司的至少一项核心能力通常应与理解和服务客户直接相关，即附表1中价值链的右半部分。拥有世界上最先进技术的高科技公司如果忽视这一警告，往往会失败。另一方面，默克公司将其卓越的基础研究与同样出色的处方药营销技术相匹配。
By aggressively analyzing its customers, value chains, a company can often identify where it can specialize and provide an activity at lower cost or more effectively to the customer. Such analyses have created whole new Industries, like the specialized mortgage broker, syndication, secondary market, transaction-processing, escrow, title search, and insurance businesses that have now taken over these risks and functions for banks and have disaggregated the entire mortgage industry.
通过积极分析其客户和价值链，公司通常可以确定其可以在哪里进行专业化，并以更低的成本或更有效地向客户提供活动。这些分析创造了全新的行业，如专业抵押贷款经纪人、银团贷款、二级市场、交易处理、托管、产权搜索和保险业务，这些业务现在已经为银行接管了这些风险和职能，并对整个抵押贷款行业进行了细分。
7. Embedded in the organizations systems. Maintainable competencies cannot depend on one or two talented stars – such as Steven Jobs and Stephen Wozniak at Apple or Herbert Boyer and Arthur D. Riggs at Genentech – whose departure could destroy a company’s success. Instead, the firm must convert these competencies into a corporate reputation or culture that outlives the stars. Especially when a strategy is heavily dependent on creativity, personal dedication, and initiative or on attracting top-flight professionals, core competencies must be captured within the company’s systems – broadly defined to include its values, organization structures, and management systems.
7.嵌入组织系统。可维持的能力不能依赖于一两位才华横溢的明星——比如苹果公司的史蒂文·乔布斯和斯蒂芬·沃兹尼亚克，或者基因泰克公司的赫伯特·博伊尔和亚瑟·D·里格斯——他们的离开可能会毁掉一家公司的成功。相反，公司必须将这些能力转化为比明星更长寿的企业声誉或文化。尤其是当一项战略在很大程度上依赖于创造力、个人奉献精神和主动性或吸引顶级专业人士时，必须在公司的体系中获取核心能力——广义上定义为包括其价值观、组织结构和管理体系。
Such competencies might include recruiting (McKinsey, Goldman Sachs), training (McDonald’s, Disney), marketing Procter Gamble, Hallmark), innovation (Sony, 3M), motivation systems (ServiceMaster), or control of remote and diverse operating sites within a common framework and philosophy (Exxon, CRA, Inc.). These systems are often at the heart of consistent superior performance; in many cases, a firm’s systems become its core competencies.(12)
这些能力可能包括招聘（麦肯锡、高盛）、培训（麦当劳、迪士尼）、营销宝洁、霍尔马克）、创新（索尼、3M）、激励系统（ServiceMaster），或在共同的框架和理念内控制远程和多样化的运营场所（埃克森、CRA、股份有限公司）。这些系统往往是始终如一的卓越性能的核心；在许多情况下，企业的系统成为其核心竞争力。(12)
Preeminence: The key strategic barrier
卓越：关键的战略障碍
For Its selected core competencies, the company must ensure that it maintains absolute preeminence. It may also need to surround these core competencies with defensive positions, both upstream and downstream. In some cases, it may have to perform some activities where it is not best-in-world, just to keep existing or potential competitors from learning, taking over, eroding, or bypassing elements of its special competencies. In fact, managers should consciously develop these core competencies to block competitors strategically and avoid outsourcing them or giving suppliers access to the critical knowledge bases or skills that underpin them.
对于其选定的核心竞争力，公司必须确保保持绝对的优势。它可能还需要用上游和下游的防御阵地来围绕这些核心能力。在某些情况下，它可能不得不在世界上不是最好的地方进行一些活动，只是为了防止现有或潜在的竞争对手学习、接管、侵蚀或绕过其特殊能力的要素。事实上，管理者应该有意识地发展这些核心能力，以从战略上阻止竞争对手，避免将其外包或让供应商获得支撑其的关键知识库或技能。
Honda, for example, does all its engine R&D in-house and makes all the critical parts for its small motor design core competency in closely controlled facilities in Japan. It will consider outsourcing any other noncritical elements in its products, but builds a careful strategic block around this most essential element for all its businesses.(13) Most important, as a company’s preeminence in selected fields grows, its knowledge-based core competencies become ever harder to overtake. Knowledge bases tend to grow exponentially in value with Investment and experience. Intellectual leadership tends to attract the most talented people, who then work on and solve the most interesting problems. The combination in turn creates higher returns and attracts the next round of outstanding talent. In addition to the examples we have already cited, organizations as diverse as Bechtel, AT&T Bell Labs, Microsoft, Boeing, Intel, Merck, Genentech, McKinsey, Arthur Andersen, Sony, Nike, Nintendo, Bankers Trust, and Mayo Clinic have found this to be true.
例如，本田的所有发动机研发都是在内部进行的，并在日本的严格控制的工厂中生产其小型电机设计核心能力的所有关键零部件。它将考虑外包其产品中的任何其他非关键元素，但围绕这一最重要的元素为其所有业务构建一个谨慎的战略区块。（13） 最重要的是，随着一家公司在特定领域的卓越地位不断提高，其以知识为基础的核心竞争力变得越来越难以超越。随着投资和经验的增加，知识库的价值往往呈指数级增长。智慧型领导往往会吸引最有才华的人，然后他们会致力于解决最有趣的问题。这种组合反过来又创造了更高的回报，并吸引了下一轮的杰出人才。除了我们已经列举的例子外，柏克德、AT&T贝尔实验室、微软、波音、英特尔、默克、基因泰克、麦肯锡、安达信、索尼、耐克、任天堂、银行家信托和梅奥诊所等各种组织都发现这是真的。
Some executives regard core activities as those the company is continuously engaged in, while peripheral activities are those that are intermittent and therefore can be outsourced. From a strategic outsourcing viewpoint, however, core competencies are the activities that offer long-term competitive advantage and thus must be rigidly controlled and protected. Peripheral activities are those not critical to the company’s competitive edge.
一些高管将核心活动视为公司持续从事的活动，而外围活动则是间歇性的，因此可以外包。然而，从战略外包的角度来看，核心竞争力是提供长期竞争优势的活动，因此必须严格控制和保护。外围活动是那些对公司的竞争优势并不重要的活动。
Strategic outsourcing 战略外包
If supplier markets were totally reliable and efficient, rational companies would outsource everything except those special activities in which they could achieve a unique competitive edge, that is, their core competencies. Unfortunately, most supplier markets are, imperfect and do entails some risks for both buyer and seller with respect to price, quality, time, or other key dimensions. Moreover, outsourcing entails unique transaction costs – searching, contracting, controlling, and recontracting – that at times may exceed the transaction costs of having the activity directly under management’s in-house control.
如果供应商市场是完全可靠和高效的，理性的公司就会外包一切，除了那些他们可以获得独特竞争优势的特殊活动，即他们的核心竞争力。不幸的是，大多数供应商市场都是不完美的，确实会给买方和卖方带来价格、质量、时间或其他关键方面的一些风险。此外，外包需要独特的交易成本——搜索、签约、控制和重新签约——有时可能超过将活动直接置于管理层内部控制之下的交易成本。
To address these difficulties, managers must answer three key questions about any activity considered for outsourcing. First, what is the potential for obtaining competitive advantage in this activity, taking account of transaction costs? Second, what is the potential vulnerability that could arise from market failure if the activity is outsourced? Conceptually, these two factors ca n be arrayed In a simple matrix . Third, what can we do to alleviate our vulnerability by structuring arrangements with suppliers to afford appropriate controls yet provide for necessary flexibilities in demand?
为了解决这些困难，管理人员必须回答关于外包活动的三个关键问题。首先，考虑到交易成本，在这项活动中获得竞争优势的潜力是什么？第二，如果活动外包，市场失灵可能导致的潜在漏洞是什么？从概念上讲，这两个因素可以排列在一个简单的矩阵中。第三，我们能做些什么来减轻我们的脆弱性，通过与供应商建立安排，提供适当的控制，同时提供必要的需求灵活性？
The two extremes in exhibit 2 are relatively straightforward. When the potential for both competitive edge and strategic vulnerability is high, the company needs a high degree of control, usually entailing production internally or through joint ownership arrangements or tight long-term contracts (explicit or implicity).
图表2中的两个极端相对简单。当竞争优势和战略脆弱性的潜力都很高时，公司需要高度的控制，通常需要内部或通过共同所有权安排或严格的长期合同（明示或默示）进行生产。
Marks’k Spencer, for example, is famous for its network of tied suppliers, which create the unique brands and styles that underpin the retailer’s value reputation. Spot suppliers would be too unreliable and unlikely to meet the demanding standards that are Marks & Spencer’s unique consumer franchise. Hence, close control of product quality, design, technology, and equipment through contracts and even financial support is essential.
例如，Marks’k Spencer以其捆绑供应商网络而闻名，这些供应商创造了支撑零售商价值声誉的独特品牌和风格。现货供应商太不可靠，不太可能达到玛莎百货独特的消费者特许经营权所要求的标准。因此，通过合同甚至财政支持对产品质量、设计、技术和设备进行密切控制至关重要。
The opposite case is perhaps office cleaning, where little competitive edge is usually possible and there is an active and deep market of supplier firms. In between, there is a continuous range of activities requiring different degrees of control and strategic flexibility.
相反的情况可能是办公室清洁，那里通常没有什么竞争优势，而且有一个活跃而深入的供应商公司市场。在这两者之间，有一系列持续的活动需要不同程度的控制和战略灵活性。
At each Intervening point, the question is not just whether to make or buy, but how to implement a desired balance between independence and incentives for the supplier versus control and security for the buyer. Most companies will benefit by extending outsourcing first in less critical areas, or in parts of activities, like payroll, rather than all of accounting. As they gain experience, they may increase profit opportunities greatly by outsourcing more critical activities to noncompeting firms that can perform them more effectively independence and incentl,v
在每一个干预点上，问题不仅仅是制造还是购买，而是如何在供应商的独立性和激励性与买方的控制和安全性之间实现预期的平衡。大多数公司将受益于将外包首先扩展到不太关键的领域，或扩展到工资等部分活动，而不是全部会计。随着他们获得经验，他们可能会通过将更关键的活动外包给不具竞争力的公司来大大增加利润机会，这些公司可以更有效地独立和激励他们
In a few cases, more complex alliances with competitors may be essential to garner specialized skills that cannot be obtained in other ways. At each level, the company must isolate and rigorously control strategically critical relationships between its suppliers and its customers.
在少数情况下，与竞争对手建立更复杂的联盟可能对获得其他方式无法获得的专业技能至关重要。在每一个层面上，公司都必须隔离并严格控制供应商和客户之间的战略关键关系。
Competitive edge 竞争优势
The key strategic issue in insourcing versus outsourcing is whether a company can achieve a maintainable competitive edge by performing an activity internally – usually cheaper, better, in a more timely fashion, or with some unique capability – on a continuing basis. If one or more of these dimensions is critical to the customer and if the company can perform that function uniquely well, the activity should be kept in-house. Many companies unfortunately assume that because they have historically performed an activity internally, or because it seems integral to their business, the activity should be insourced. However, on closer investigation and with careful benchmarking, a company’s internal capabilities may turn out to be significantly below those of best-in-world suppliers.
内包与外包的关键战略问题是，一家公司能否通过在内部持续开展活动（通常更便宜、更好、更及时或具有一些独特的能力）来获得可维持的竞争优势。如果这些维度中的一个或多个对客户至关重要，并且公司能够非常好地履行这一职能，则应将活动保留在内部。不幸的是，许多公司认为，因为他们历史上曾在内部开展过一项活动，或者因为这似乎是其业务不可或缺的一部分，所以该活动应该是外包的。然而，经过更仔细的调查和仔细的基准测试，一家公司的内部能力可能会大大低于世界上最好的供应商。
Ford Motor Company, for example, found that many of its Internal suppliers’ quality practices and costs were nowhere near those of external suppliers when it began its famous “best in class” worldwide benchmarking studies on 400 subassemblies for the new Taurus-Sable line. A New York bank with extensive worldwide operations Investigated why its Federal Express costs were soaring and found that its Internal mall department took two days more than Federal Express to get a letter or package from the third floor to the fortieth floor of Its building.
例如，福特汽车公司（Ford Motor Company）在开始对新Taurus Sable生产线的400个组件进行著名的“同类最佳”全球基准研究时，发现其许多内部供应商的质量实践和成本与外部供应商相去甚远。一家在全球拥有广泛业务的纽约银行调查了其联邦快递成本飙升的原因，发现其内部购物中心部门比联邦快递多花了两天时间才能将信件或包裹从其大楼的三楼送到四十楼。
In interviews about benchmarking with top operating managers in both service and manufacturing companies, we frequently encountered some paraphrase of “We thought we were the best in the world at many activities. But when we benchmarked against the best external suppliers, we found we were not even up to the worst of the benchmarking cases.”
在与服务业和制造业公司的顶级运营经理进行基准测试的采访中，我们经常会遇到这样的说法：“我们认为自己在许多活动中都是世界上最好的。但当我们与最好的外部供应商进行基准测试时，我们发现自己甚至达不到最糟糕的基准测试。”
Transaction costs
交易成本
In all calculations, analysts must include internal transaction costs as well as those associated with external sourcing. If the company is to produce the item or service internally on a long-term basis, it must back up its decision with continuing R&D, personnel development, and infrastructure investments that at least match those of the best external supplier; otherwise, it will lose its competitive edge over time. Managers often tend to overlook such backup costs, as well as the losses from laggard innovation and unresponsiveness of internal groups that know they have a guaranteed market.
在所有计算中，分析师必须包括内部交易成本以及与外部来源相关的成本。如果公司要在内部长期生产产品或服务，则必须通过持续的研发、人员发展和基础设施投资来支持其决定，这些投资至少与最佳外部供应商的投资相匹配；否则，随着时间的推移，它将失去竞争优势。管理者往往会忽视这种备份成本，以及创新落后和内部团队反应迟钝造成的损失，因为他们知道自己有一个有保障的市场。
Finally, there are the headquarters and support costs of constantly managing the insourced activity. One of the great gains of outsourcing is the decrease in executive time spent managing peripheral activities – freeing top management to focus more on the core of Its business.
最后，还有不断管理外包活动的总部和支助费用。外包的一大好处是减少了高管管理外围活动的时间，使高层管理人员能够更多地专注于其核心业务。
Various studies have shown that when these internal transaction costs are thoroughly analyzed, they can be extremely high.(14) Since it is easier to identify the explicit transaction costs of dealing with external suppliers, these generally tend to be included in analyses. Harder-to-identify internal transaction costs, however, are often not included, thus biasing results.
各种研究表明，当对这些内部交易成本进行彻底分析时，它们可能会非常高。（14） 由于更容易确定与外部供应商打交道的明确交易成本，这些成本通常会包含在分析中。然而，难以确定的内部交易成本往往不包括在内，从而使结果产生偏差。
Vulnerability 弱点
When there are many suppliers with adequate but not dominating scale) and mature market standards and terms, a potential buyer is unlikely to be more efficient than the best available supplier. If, on the other hand, there is not sufficient depth in the market, overly powerful suppliers can hold the company ransom. Conversely, if the number of suppliers is limited or individual suppliers are too weak, they may be unable to supply innovative products or services as well as a much larger buyer could by performing the activity in-house. While the activity or product might not be one of its core competencies, the company might nevertheless benefit by producing internally rather than undertaking the training, investment, and codesign expenses necessary to bring weak suppliers up to needed performance levels.
当有许多供应商具有足够但不占主导地位的规模）和成熟的市场标准和条款时，潜在买家不太可能比现有的最佳供应商更有效率。另一方面，如果市场没有足够的深度，过于强大的供应商可能会勒索公司。相反，如果供应商数量有限或个别供应商过于薄弱，他们可能无法提供创新产品或服务，而更大的买家则无法通过内部活动提供创新产品和服务。虽然活动或产品可能不是其核心竞争力之一，但公司可能会通过内部生产而受益，而不是承担必要的培训、投资和代码设计费用，以使薄弱的供应商达到所需的绩效水平。
Another form of vulnerability is the lack of information available in the marketplace or from individual suppliers., for example, a supplier may secretly expect labor disruptions or raw material problems, but hide these concerns until it is too late for the customer to go elsewhere. A related problem occurs when a supplier has unique information capabilities: for example, large wholesalers or retailers, market research firms, software companies, or legal specialists may have information or fact-gathering systems that would be impossible for the buyer or any other single supplier to reproduce efficiently. Such suppliers may be able to charge what are essentially monopoly prices, but purchasing from them could still be less costly than reproducing the service Internally. In other cases, there may be many capable suppliers (for example, in R&D or software), but the costs of adequately monitoring progress on the suppliers, premises might make outsourcing prohibitive.
另一种形式的漏洞是缺乏市场上或个别供应商提供的信息。，例如，供应商可能会暗中预期劳动力中断或原材料问题，但会隐瞒这些担忧，直到客户去其他地方为时已晚。当供应商具有独特的信息能力时，就会出现相关问题：例如，大型批发商或零售商、市场研究公司、软件公司或法律专家可能拥有买方或任何其他供应商无法有效复制的信息或事实收集系统。这些供应商可能能够收取基本上垄断的价格，但从他们那里购买服务的成本仍然低于在内部复制服务的成本。在其他情况下，可能有许多有能力的供应商（例如，在研发或软件方面），但充分监测供应商进展的成本可能会使外包望而却步。
Sometimes the whole structure of information in an industry will militate for or against outsourcing. Computing, for example, was largely kept in-house in Its early years because the information available to a buyer of computing services and Its ability to make judgments about such services were very different for the buying company (which knew very little) than for the supplier (which had excellent information). Many buyers lacked the competency either to assess or to monitor sellers, and feared loss of vital information. A company can outsource computing more easily today, in part because buyers, computer, technical management, and software knowhow are sufficient to make informed judgments about external suppliers.
有时，一个行业的整个信息结构都会支持或反对外包。例如，计算机在其早期主要保留在内部，因为计算机服务购买者可获得的信息及其对此类服务做出判断的能力与购买公司（知之甚少）和供应商（信息丰富）截然不同。许多买家缺乏评估或监控卖家的能力，并担心丢失重要信息。如今，一家公司可以更容易地将计算外包，部分原因是买家、计算机、技术管理和软件专业知识足以对外部供应商做出明智的判断。
In addition to information anomalies, Stuckey and White note three types of “asset specificity” that commonly create market imperfections, calling for controlled sourcing solutions rather than relying on efficient markets.(15) These are: (1) site specificity, where sellers have located costly fixed assets in close proximity to the buyer, thus minimizing transport and inventory costs for a single supplier; (2) technical specificity, where one or both parties must invest in equipment that can be used only by the parties in conjunction with each other and has low value, in alternative uses; and (3) human capital specificity, where employees must develop in-depth skills that are specific to a particular buyer or customer relationship.
除了信息异常，Stuckey和White还指出了三种类型的“资产特异性”，它们通常会造成市场缺陷，呼吁采用可控的采购解决方案，而不是依赖高效的市场。（15） 这些是：（1）场地专用性，即卖方将昂贵的固定资产放置在买方附近，从而最大限度地减少单个供应商的运输和库存成本；（2） 技术专用性，其中一方或双方必须投资于只能由双方共同使用且价值较低的设备，用于替代用途；以及（3）人力资本的特殊性，即员工必须发展特定于特定买家或客户关系的深入技能。
Stuckey and White explain the outsourcing implications of information and specificity problems in the case of a bauxite mine and an alumina refiner. Refineries are usually located close to mines because of the high cost of transporting bauxite, relative to Its value. Refineries in turn are tuned to process the narrow set of physical properties associated with the particular mine’s bauxite.
Stuckey和White解释了铝土矿和氧化铝精炼厂的信息和特殊性问题的外包影响。炼油厂通常位于矿山附近，因为相对于铝土矿的价值，运输铝土矿的成本很高。炼油厂则被调整为处理与特定矿山铝土矿相关的一系列物理特性。
Different and highly specialized skills and assets are needed for refining versus mining. Access to Information further compounds problems., if an independent mine expects a strike, it is unlikely to share that information with its customers, unless there are strong incentives. As a result, the aluminum industry has moved toward vertical integration or strong bilateral joint ventures, as opposed to open outsourcing of bauxite supplies – despite the apparent presence of a commodity product and many suppliers and sellers. In this case, issues of both competitive advantage and potential market failure dictate a higher degree of sourcing control.
精炼和采矿需要不同的高度专业化的技能和资产。获取信息进一步加剧了问题。，如果一家独立矿山预计会发生罢工，它不太可能与客户分享这些信息，除非有强有力的激励措施。因此，铝行业已转向垂直整合或强大的双边合资企业，而不是公开外包铝土矿供应——尽管明显存在大宗商品和许多供应商和销售商。在这种情况下，竞争优势和潜在市场失败的问题要求更高程度的采购控制。
Degree of source control 源头控制程度
In deciding on a sourcing strategy for a particular segment of their business, managers have a wide range of control options the Exhibits 3 and 4 for the most basic). Where there is high potential both for vulnerability and for competitive edge, tight control is indicated (as in the bauxite case). At the opposite end is, say, office cleaning. Between these extremes are opportunities for developing special incentives or more complex oversight contracts to balance intermediate levels of vulnerability against more moderate prospects for competitive edge. Nike’s multi-tier strategy offers an interesting example.
在决定其特定业务部门的采购战略时，经理们有广泛的控制选择（最基本的是附表3和4）。在脆弱性和竞争优势都有很大潜力的地方，需要严格控制（如铝土矿）。另一端是，比如说，办公室清洁。在这些极端之间，有机会制定特殊激励措施或更复杂的监督合同，以平衡中等程度的脆弱性和更温和的竞争优势前景。耐克的多层战略提供了一个有趣的例子。
The practice and law of strategic alliances are rapidly developing new ways to deal with common control issues – by establishing specified procedures that permit direct involvement in limited stages of a partner’s activities, without incurring either ownership arrangements or the loss of control inherent ln arm’s-length transactions.
战略联盟的实践和法律正在迅速发展新的方法来处理共同的控制问题——通过建立特定的程序，允许直接参与合作伙伴活动的有限阶段，而不会产生所有权安排或失去公平交易中固有的控制权。
Flexibility versus control 灵活性与控制
Within this framework, there is a constant tradeoff between flexibility and control. One of the main purposes of outsourcing is to have the supplier assume certain classes of investment and risk, such as demand variability. To optimize costs, the buying company may want to maintain its internal capacity at re atively constant levels despite highly fluctuating sales demands. Under these circumstances, it needs a surge strategy.
在这个框架内，灵活性和控制之间存在着不断的权衡。外包的主要目的之一是让供应商承担某些类别的投资和风险，例如需求可变性。为了优化成本，尽管销售需求波动很大，但采购公司可能希望将其内部产能保持在相对恒定的水平。在这种情况下，它需要一个增兵战略。
McDonald’s, for example, with $8billion in sales and 10.1 percent growth per year, needs to call in part-time and casual workers to handle extensive daily variations yet also be able to select its future permanent or managerial personnel from these people. IBM has had the opposite problem, since its core demand has been declining, the company has had to lay off employees. Yet it needs surge capacity for: (1) quick access to some former employees, basic skills; (2) available production capacity without the costs of supporting facilities full time; and (3) the ability to exploit strong outside parties’ specialized capabilities through temporary consortia – for example, in applications software, microprocessors, network development, or factory automation.
例如，麦当劳的销售额为80亿美元，每年增长10.1%，它需要招聘兼职和临时工来处理大量的日常变化，同时也能够从这些人中选择未来的长期或管理人员。IBM遇到了相反的问题，由于其核心需求一直在下降，该公司不得不裁员。然而，它需要激增的能力：（1）快速接触一些前员工，掌握基本技能；（2） 可用的生产能力，无需全职配套设施的成本；以及（3）通过临时联盟利用强大的外部方专业能力的能力，例如在应用软件、微处理器、网络开发或工厂自动化方面。
Strategically, McDonald’s has created a pool of people available on “call options,” while IBM – through spinouts of factories with baseload commitments to IBM, guaranteed consulting employment for key people, flexible joint venturts, and strategic alliances – has created ” put options” to handle surge needs as it downsizes and tries to turn around its business. There is a full spectrum of outsourcing arrangements, depending on the company’s control and flexibility needs (see Exhibit 4). The issue is less whether to make or buy an activity than it is how to structure internal versus external sourcing on an optimal basis. Companies are outsourcing much more of what used to be considered either integral elements of their value chains or necessary staff activities. Because of greater complexity, higher specialization, and new technological capabilities, outside suppliers can now perform many such activities at lower cost and with higher value-added than a fully integrated company can.
从战略上讲，麦当劳已经建立了一个可供选择的人才库，而IBM——通过对IBM做出基本负荷承诺的工厂的分拆，保证关键人员的咨询就业，灵活的合资企业，以及战略联盟——创建了“看跌期权”，以在其缩小规模并试图扭转业务时应对激增的需求。根据公司的控制和灵活性需求，有全方位的外包安排（见附件4）。问题不在于是制作还是购买一项活动，而在于如何在最佳的基础上构建内部采购与外部采购。公司正在外包更多过去被认为是其价值链不可或缺的组成部分或必要的员工活动。由于更大的复杂性、更高的专业化程度和新的技术能力，外部供应商现在可以以比完全整合的公司更低的成本和更高的附加值开展许多此类活动。
In some cases, new production technologies have moved manufacturing economies of scale toward the supplier. In others, service technologies have lowered transaction costs substantially, making it possible to specify, transport, store, and coordinate inputs from external sources so inexpensively that the balance of benefits has shifted from insourcing to outsourcing. In certain specialized niches, outside companies have grown to such size and sophistication that they have developed economies of scale, scope, and knowledge intensity so formidable that neither smaller nor more integrated producers can effectively compete with them (for example, ADP Services in payroll, and ServiceMaster in maintenance). To the extent that knowledge of a specific activity is more important than knowledge of the end product itself, specialized suppliers can often produce higher value-added at lower cost for that activity than almost any integrated company.
在某些情况下，新的生产技术使制造业的规模经济转向了供应商。在另一些情况下，服务技术大大降低了交易成本，使指定、运输、存储和协调来自外部来源的投入变得可能，成本如此低廉，以至于利益平衡已经从内包转向外包。在某些专业领域，外部公司的规模和复杂程度已经发展到规模经济、范围经济和知识密集度如此之高，以至于规模较小或更一体化的生产商都无法与之有效竞争（例如，工资方面的ADP服务和维护方面的ServiceMaster）。在某种程度上，特定活动的知识比最终产品本身的知识更重要，专业供应商通常可以以比几乎任何综合公司更低的成本为该活动创造更高的附加值。
Strategic benefits versus risks 战略利益与风险
Too often companies look at outsourcing as a means to lower only short-term direct costs. However, through strategic outsourcing, companies can lower their long-term capital investments and leverage their key competencies significantly, as Apple and Nike have done. They can also force many types of risk and unwanted management problems onto suppliers.
公司往往将外包视为一种只降低短期直接成本的手段。然而，通过战略外包，公司可以降低长期资本投资，并显著利用其关键能力，就像苹果和耐克所做的那样。它们还可能将许多类型的风险和不必要的管理问题强加给供应商。
Gallo, the largest producer and distributor of wines in the United States, outsources most of its grapes, pushing the risks of weather, land prices, and labor problems onto its suppliers.
加洛是美国最大的葡萄酒生产商和经销商，它将大部分葡萄外包，将天气、地价和劳动力问题的风险推给了供应商。
Argyle Diamonds, one of the world’s largest diamond producers, outsources virtually all aspects of its operation except the crucial steps of separation and sorting of diamonds. It contracts all its huge earth-moving operations (to avoid capital and labor risks), its housing and food services for workers (to avoid confrontations on nonoperating issues), and much of its distribution (to De Beers to protect prices, to finance inventories, and to avoid the complications of worldwide distribution). By outsourcing to best-in-class suppliers in each case, it further ensures the quality and image of its operations.
Argyle Diamonds是世界上最大的钻石生产商之一，几乎将其运营的所有方面外包，但钻石分离和分拣的关键步骤除外。它承包了所有大型土方作业（以避免资本和劳动力风险）、为工人提供的住房和食品服务（以避免在非经营问题上发生冲突），以及大部分分销（给戴比尔斯以保护价格、为库存融资，并避免全球分销的复杂性）。通过在每种情况下外包给一流的供应商，它进一步确保了运营的质量和形象。
Important strategic benefits
重要的战略利益
Strategically, outsourcing can provide the buyer with greater flexibility, especially in the purchase of rapidly developing new technologies, fashion goods, or the myriad components of complex systems. It reduces the company’s design-cycle t
从战略上讲，外包可以为买家提供更大的灵活性，尤其是在购买快速发展的新技术、时尚商品或复杂系统的无数组件时。它减少了公司的设计周期
本站提供各国各专业Research Paper范文，Research Paper代写以及Research Paper写作辅导，如有需要可咨询本平台。
