Many enterprises often ponder the “build vs. buy?” question in regard to many internal business operations, wondering whether or not to develop internal competencies regarding a specific function or outsource certain capabilities to a third-party solution or services provider. This has long been a question in the contingent workforce management (CWM) arena, as companies across the globe contemplate whether to internally-manage the totality of their non-employee workforce operations, or, hand over the reins to a Managed Service Provider (MSP).
In 2019, and, moving into a brand-new decade, what is the answer to the “in-house CWM program or outsourced CWM program?” question? The truth is that there is no correct response. For some businesses, the stress-free, hands-off approach of leveraging an MSP helps many a CWM leader sleep better at night, knowing that everything from supplier communications and core supplier contracts to compliance and risk mitigation is taken care of across the totality of the non-employee workforce.
However, for other businesses, there may be a core preference to develop an internally-led program that handles the day-to-day operations of a contingent workforce program. Ardent Partners research has discovered that 23% of businesses are currently managing their contingent workforce programs via an in-house, internally-developed initiative.
On Thursday (10:30am ET), I will join VectorVMS for a complimentary webcast on the core considerations of building an in-house CWM program and the best practices in doing so. Cindy Chunn (Senior Program Manager at VectorVMS) and I will also discuss the various models that enterprises are currently leveraging for their internally-developed contingent workforce programs. Click here to register for the event.
In analyzing the “build vs. buy” debate, there are many matters that must be considered, including:
- What is the combined technology acumen of the proposed in-house CWM team? CWM leaders will have to analyze their teams’ technology expertise, as a critical factor in this debate is whether or not internal resources can effectively navigate the “contingent workforce technology ecosystem,” which includes Vendor Management Systems (VMS), spend management solutions, SOW management and services procurement, as well as compliance and risk mitigation. Too, with the emergence of digital and on-demand staffing solutions, in-house programs must configure the “technology expertise” angle.
- Let’s back up…who’s even on this team? It’s a great question. Ardent research also points to another interesting fact: businesses are nearly evenly-split on the best-aligned function to manage the non-employee workforce. Procurement, talent acquisition, and human capital management/human resources all have fantastic strengths to bring the table, strengths that are often foils to their counterparts’ inefficiencies.
- What’s the long-term viability of an in-house program? For some organizations, an internally-run contingent workforce program eventually “builds” on itself as time passes, adding more expertise, more technology acumen, and greater control over CWM operations. However, the continued growth of the non-employee workforce (41.5% of the average organization’s total workforce, according to Ardent’s research) may force some in-house programs to reevaluate the ages-old “build vs. buy” debate.
- Chris, just tell me if my business is an ideal fit for an in-house CWM program. Join me on Thursday to find out!
RELATED ARTICLES
Innovation: The Foundation of the Best-in-Class Contingent Workforce Program
Five Ways to Build a Best-in-Class Contingent Workforce Program
The Top Priorities of Today’s Contingent Workforce Management Programs
