Cognizant recently topped the customer satisfaction and recommendation rankings in the four-country region (Finland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden) in KPMG’s Outsourcing 2012 study of service provider performance in the Nordic region.
sourcingfocus.com spoke to Jayajyoti Sengupta, Cognizant's Country Manager for the Nordics to find out about how Cognizant ensure customer satisfaction.
Please can you elaborate further on this: “Our high-touch relationship model, deep domain expertise and consulting skills, unique reinvestment philosophy, and our ability to build strong multicultural teams around the globe have helped our customers navigate structural changes in the economy and their industries, enabling them to stay efficient, effective, and innovative.”
Clients across industries—financial services, healthcare, pharmaceutical, retail, media and entertainment—are going through structural shifts driven by globalization, virtualization, digitization, regulatory changes, consumerization and new technology architectures (such as social, mobile, analytics and cloud). This has led to clients seeking dual mandates of cost agility (efficiency and effectiveness) and innovation (business transformation).
While clients IT budgets have largely been flat to modestly up, they expect to achieve much more from less. This calls for working with a partner who can address the dual challenges of cost agility and innovation off one platform within the available budget.
That’s where a company like Cognizant excels because of its years of managing its target operating margins lower than comparable peers but reinvesting the excess back into the business for high levels of customer relationship management, technology excellence, multi-cultural and domain expertise. Today, Cognizant has over 1,000 client partners and account managers who are responsible for the high-touch relationship architecture, over 3,000 pure-play consultants and dozens of technology centers of excellence, and 1 MBA for every 25 software professionals, globally.
These investments help clients drive cost down on existing infrastructure and applications and helps clients to use the freed up dollar to invest in growth and innovation, thereby addressing both the bottom-line and topline needs of clients.
How does the high-touch relationship model differ from traditional governance?
We have seen two traditional models depending on the starting points of companies and how they evolved. With global system integrators who started off in the US or Europe, the center of gravity was in the US or Europe and their offshore/global delivery locations were started as extensions. It’s more of a passing-the-baton or throw it over the wall model. While for Indian companies their expansion to the rest of the world was with the view that expansion to other parts of the world was a necessary sales and marketing activity. The centre of gravity of these organisations was in Mumbai, Bangalore, Hyderabad, etc. For many people who went to work for these companies in geographies outside India, it created a very difficult environment to be successful as an executive or as an individual because the centre of gravity was in India.
In our model—what we call the two-in-a-box model—the centre of gravity is not geographic but vested in a group of people. Through the two-in-a-box model—at an account level, at a customer level—the centre of gravity rests with two individuals, the Delivery Director and the Client Partner.
Does having named leaders offshore effect delivery?
It makes no difference that the Delivery Manager is delivering from India or China, or that the Client Partner is engaging with the client in the US or Europe. Each one individually and jointly feels accountable, empowered and responsible for the success of the client. In the two-in-a-box model, they together define the success of the client along the same terms—a sort of soft concept, but that’s how it really works on the ground.
We believe the two-in-a-box model is superior to the passing-the-baton or throw it over the wall models of other companies because there is no opportunity for loss or dilution anywhere in our model. In the passing-the-baton model, you need to align two sets of people in two separate stages.
Ours is more of a relationship model and the execution is good because there is alignment of all stakeholders from the start.