A study of Thought Process Outsourcing and its execution in Business and Academic Institutions

Dr Subrata Chattopadhyay

Professor, University of Engineering and Management, Kolkata

The term “ Thought Process Outsourcing” is relatively new and not much research into the concept has been done as yet. Yet it remains a very important aspect of decision roll out . Simplistically putting, it’s a process by which the top management or someone senior in professional hierarchy in an Organisation puts forth their thoughts, vision and ideology and expect it to be carried out in the way they envisioned.

Thus the concept of “Thought Process Outsourcing” is to get things done in a way that people at the helm desire it to be executed. It is an outcome resulting in execution of the discussions and directions as laid with the expectation that the experiences and the future pathway foreseen would be carried out seamlessly by those who are entrusted to do the same.

The basic ideology and the rationale behind the same is to get the cherished outcome as expected in a scheduled time frame in a way as wanted. Hence choice of the right person at the right time for the right job with the right skill set is of paramount importance. Herein comes the judicious choice which is dependent on the prudence, the clear thought process, understanding of the controllable and uncontrollable and selection of the people based on their strengths and capabilities.

However the concern lies that most of the people at the Senior Management level lay down the objectives which again is not well defined and there is irregular monitoring and rectification of the same so things go according to the plan. This leads to skewed outcomes and unrealized project deliverables. The more the power-distance dimension of Hofstede, the less the chance that the project envisioning will be carried out with the effectiveness it deserves. Research justifies that the end result cannot be obtained just by giving directions and expect it to be done with limited or no association.

The second important aspect of outsourcing the thought process is that it percolates through the levels and more the number of levels between decision making and implementation to execution the higher the chances of distortion as is evidenced by many a research literature on communication and channel management. There can be a short term, medium term and long term repercussions of the same too. Lower the term and the time taken and more closed the loop the higher is the propensity that the execution will be carried out to a T.

Many a times the right and efficient person is ignored and sidelined too and there is a bias and favouritism, as a result of which there is a wide gap between expectation and actuals. Non availability of the resources in time when it is highly required is another concern. Besides, many a times things are dumped on someone who is already neck deep into myriad activities and assignments as expected from the job role, however since there is evidence and/ or previous record of successful execution , the expectation is that in the future too the performance will be satisfactory.

Thus there are lots of aspects as regards the competence of the outsourcee and the expertise, the number of levels down it would be delivered at actuals, the clarity of communication and the transparency in expectation. The role of team work and collaborative rather than a directive approach plays a significant role in the same. This leads to ownership of the job assigned aas the idea/ vision can only be impeccably done if there is availability, approachability, accessibility,encouragement, enthusiasm and sense of purpose.

The fitness of purpose and the strategic intent too play a stellar role in the outsourcing process. It is not possible for an individual to carry out all that needs to be done by self, hence the requirement of a “Team”, who can be relied on and who can deliver the same with utmost sincerity.

There is again a concern of autocracy which is quite often observed, which leads to grave dissonance. Sharing the thoughts aloud and welcoming perspectives from others opens up the window for discussion which is of very much essence. Views of the other team members allow debate and discussion of the pros and cons and enable a concrete decision for a strategic move to be taken. This allows others to play the devils advocate and oppose any of the thoughts and streamlines the move. There has to be synchronization of the thoughts and action and hence bonding as a Team member who understands the strengths and weaknesses, is pivotal to success in any business / Institution for synergistic outcomes.

References:
Brownell, J. (2009). Listening: Attitudes, principles, and skills. Boston, MA: Pearson.
Brun, J. P. (2010). Missing pieces: 7 ways to improve employee well-being and organizational effectiveness. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Burstein, J. (2010). Have you heard?: Active listening. New York, NY: Crabtree Publishing.
Canary, H. (2011). Communication and organizational knowledge: Contemporary issues for theory and practice. Florence, KY: Taylor & Francis.
Cheney, G. (2011). Organizational communication in an age of globalization: Issues, reflections, practices. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.
Eisenberg, E. M. (2010). Organizational communication: Balancing creativity and constraint. New York, NY: Saint Martin’s.
Ghodeswar, B & Vaidyanathan, J (2008) ‘Business process outsourcing: an approach to
gain access to world-class capabilities’, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 14
No. 1
Hoecht A., Trott P., 2006, “Outsourcing, information leakage and the risk of losing
technologybased competencies”; European Business Review, Vol.18, No.5, pp.395-412
Hill, C. & Jones, G. (2012): Strategic management Theory: An integrated approach
Hinde S., 2003, “The law, cybercrime, risk assessment and cyber protection”; Computers
& Security, Vol.22, No.2, pp.90-95
Karyda M., Mitrou E., Quirchmayr G., 2006, “A framework for outsourcing IS/IT security
services”; Information Management & Computer Security, Vol. 14, No. 5, pp. 402-415
Kahn, R. and Cannell, C. (1957) The Dynamics of Interviewing. New York and
Chichester: Wiley.
Kakabadse, A & Kakabadse, N (2005) ‘Outsourcing: Current and Future Trends’.
Thunderbird International Business Review, Vol. 47(2) 183–204
Longest, B. B., Rakich, J. S., & Darr, K. (2000). Managing health services organizations (4th ed.). Baltimore: Health Professions Press, Inc.
Lunenburg, F.C,& Irby, B. J. (2006). The Principalship: Vision to action. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Cengage.
Matthews, L. J., & G. M. Crow (2010). The Principalship: New roles in a professional learning community. Boston, MA: Pearson.
McShane, S. L., & Von Glinow, M. A. (2003). Organizational behavior: Emerging realities for the workplace revolution (2nd ed.).Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Pauley, J. A. (2010). Communication: The key to effective leadership. Milwaukee, WI: ASQ Quality Press.
Rogers, C. R., & Farson, R. F. (n.d.). Active listening. Chicago, IL; Industrial Relations Center, University of Chicago.
Sanchez, Y. & Guo, K.L. (2005). Workplace Communication. Boston, MA: Pearson
Sergiovanni, T. J. (2009). The Principalship: A reflective practice perspective. Boson, MA: Pearson.
Shaw, G. B. (2011). The wit and wisdom of George Bernard Shaw. Mineola, NY; Dover Publications.
Shettleworth, S. J. (2010). Cognition, evolution, and behavior. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Summers, D. C. (2010). Quality management: Creating and sustaining organizational effectiveness. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice
Hall.
Tareilo, J. (2011). Other side of the desk: A 20/20 look at the Principalship. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Tourish, D. (2010). Auditing organizational communication: A handbook of research, theory, and practice. New York, NY: Routledge.
Ubben, G. C., Hughes, L. W., & Norris, C. J. (2010). The principal: Creative leadership for excellence in schools (7th ed.). Boston,MA: Pearson.