Of Core & Contracting

A contract technology specialist I have a great deal of respect for made this comment a while back.

I’ve never understood why CIOs prefer training rather than hiring a contractor; less time, less TCO, higher quality.

Training is a long term investment in your people that can “potentially” pay off as a force multiplier in the future.  This is especially true if you are talking about a companies core competencies. Historically companies that outsource their core competencies over a long period of time get knocked out of those markets by competitors that can buy up the outsourced experience.

Investing in your people is strategic, but often unexpected opportunities demand short term tactical considerations trump long term strategy. In these situations contractors can act as the spark to jump-start initiatives and respond to unexpected problems.

Contractors make the most sense when you need high value, high quality experience as quickly as possible. Calling a contractor “the dark side” just removes a tool from a CIO’s arsenal of weapons. It is both short sighted and ignorant.

The other place that contractors really shine is for non-core competency functions. If you are not going to be an expert in some capability, you are almost always better off outsourcing that capability to someone that is. This is the reason we have seen the rise of outsourced services like HR, IT Support, and even CIOs.

Let me put is this way, if you are a company that makes X and you are the best darn X maker on the planet then you want to train future X makers so you can continue to be the best at X.  Inversely, if you are the best darn maker of X… then get someone else to install the freaking phone system!