Maximize ROI: How to Choose the Right Outsourcing Model for Your Business 

As a key decision-maker, you understand that outsourcing can significantly accelerate your company's growth 📈. However, navigating this complex process with precision and insight is imperative. With deadlines approaching and new APIs piling up 🕒, Outforce is your trusted partner in outsourcing. Over this series, we'll dissect common outsourcing pitfalls and provide strategic guidance on how to circumvent them, ensuring your projects run smoothly, effectively, on time, and within budget 🛠️.

We are delving into the crucial mistake of taking the “one-size-fits-all” approach to outsourcing. When it comes to software outsourcing, mistakes such as selecting the wrong partner, choosing the wrong outsourcing model, or mismanaging communication expectations can lead to wasted time and wasted revenue 💸. There are already simply too many ways to waste time and money in today's market, so allow us to guide you in selecting the right model for your outsourcing needs 💡.

There are three widely accepted software engineering outsourcing models: staff augmentation, integrated teams, and project-based. Understanding the differences between each of the three models is vital for selecting the right approach to meet your organization’s needs and goals and avoiding project delays and re-writes ⏳.

Unlike hats, there is no effective “one-size-fits-all” approach to outsourcing, and each of the three models defined below has specific advantages, unique to different outsourcing scenarios.

1. Staff Augmentation: consists of individual engineering contractors who are typically integrated between 20%-60% with the in-house engineering team and are managed by an in-house team lead. Staff-augmented engineers are usually billed based on time and materials because they can scale up/down as needed (although truthfully, Outforce typically sees them as 40 hours a week for a set period of time). Think of staff augmentation as a dude doing a job, a station chef in the kitchen at your restaurant 🍳.

Ideal for: adding engineering capacity for roles such as a chief architect leaning in for a few hours each week, QA testers, a full engineering team clearing technical debt on a legacy project, or a few integration engineers completing new APIs.  

2. Integrated Teams: teams of developers who are 60%-100% integrated with the in-house team and are managed by a local, in-house team lead, remote team lead, or project manager. Integrated teams are usually billed based on time and materials. Think of integrated teams as experienced chefs consulting and assisting with your new menu concept and execution 👩‍🍳.

Ideal for: long-term collaborative and typically complex projects involving heavy team synchronization. Also used when specialized contractors are expected to “live, eat, and breathe” your company so they can make more educated decisions and are privy to your business and customer strategies. 

3. Project-Based Teams: a team or teams of developers often separate from the core engineering team, with 10%-30% integration with the in-house team, but are often working on a specific project that doesn’t require much support other than leadership support and usage of client tech stack. These project-based teams are often executed with a fixed budget and are managed by a local or remote team lead. The required integration usually relates to security measures and architecture context 🔐. This is the delivery driver who picks up and delivers food based on specific instructions provided to them 🚚.

Ideal for: asynchronous development projects with a clearly defined scope of work, often pre-developed detailed epics and stories, as well as budget 💵. 

What if I choose the wrong model? 

Selecting the wrong model for your outsourcing needs goes beyond project delays and lost revenue, it can extend to the creation of end-user pain points, affecting your employees and even your customers 😓. These pain points can be navigated by understanding and aligning your expectations with the behaviors commonly seen in each of the three models.  

Staff Augmentation: Pain Points and Expected Behaviors

Pain Points: 

• Lack of process around product and code testing.
• Misaligned priorities between projects.
• Miscommunications around due date priorities.

Expected Behaviors: 

• Thorough onboarding process.
• Small, or no time zone gap to accommodate collaboration and meeting attendance (2 hours or less).
• Cultural consideration in the selection process (hot vs cold culture).

Integrated Teams: Pain Points and Expected Behaviors

Pain Points: 

• Security and IP considerations.
• In-house team role clarity.

Expected Behaviors: 

• A “one-team” mentality instead of an “us vs them” mentality.
• Robust integration and onboarding process.
• Heavy focus on communication and cultural considerations.
• Small, or no time zone gap to accommodate collaboration and meeting attendance (2 hours or less). 

Project-Based Teams: Pain Points and Expected Behaviors  

Pain Points: 

• More upfront preparation around architecture and project scope.
• More business domain context is required for contractors.
• Increased testing and check-in cadences.

Expected Behaviors: 

• Thorough project description and scope provided.
• Access to internal resources for any questions or clarification.
• A reasonable level of autonomy with the project's progress.

How can Outforce help? 

Navigating the complexities of IT outsourcing is crucial, and there's no one-size-fits-all solution. The right model can propel your projects forward, while the wrong choice can lead to setbacks 🚧. At Outforce.ai, we understand that each company's needs are unique, so we specialize in crafting customized outsourcing strategies 🎯.

‍