Table 2. Cross case comparisons Case... | Emerald Publishing

Table 2.

Cross case comparisons

Case organization	Trigger of outsourcing consideration	Preliminary research	Structure and length of the decision-making process	Roles involved in the process
Company A	Changes in the business sector. Their philosophy is to evaluate the outsourcing of all service functions. Concern about maintaining current cost and quality levels	Data collection and preliminary tenders (cost levels) from potential suppliers. Analysis of internal cost levels. Benchmarking with other companies. Risk analysis	A structured model combining project model and sourcing process. The project had a steering group making the final decisions. Decision-making criteria were weighted numerically The process took almost a year	The persons responsible for internal service delivery and representatives from sourcing and finance. HR director had a steering role
City A	Dysfunctional internal service function. Need to extend the service content	Exchanging ideas of service content with potential suppliers. Analysis of suppliers’ cost level, internal cost unknown. Benchmarking with public organizations	There is no structured project model. The decision-making authorities are determined in the city’s guiding principle The process took approximately one year	HR director and person responsible for internal service delivery. Later, the directing doctor replaced with a consultant specializing in occupational health care
Company B	Restructured ownership arrangements and a new CEO. Issues with the balance sheet	Potential suppliers and their cost levels were mapped. Some benchmarking, but the CEO mainly relied on his personal experiences	No established model for the process. Most decisions are made “ad hoc.” Board of directors approval needed above a certain investment level The decision-making process took approximately four months	The CEO prepared the decision alone and informed the board of directors
Municipality B	Need for better cost monitoring. Need to expand the service content	Potential suppliers and their cost levels mapped. Benchmarking with other municipalities	The process model for investments was implemented. The decision-making authorities are determined in the guiding principle of the municipality	The CFO prepared the decision alone, but the decision was made by the city council
Company C	Analysis of service production and benchmarking within the corporate group. Increased volumes of the service produced internally	Mapping of potential suppliers by requests for information including cost levels. Benchmarking within the corporate group. Risk analysis	A project was formed given the significance of the volume. Company management model determines decision-making authority. Decision-making process took nine month	Representation from logistics, head of service delivery, representatives from most significant internal customer units. Project owner was the CTO
Agency C	Internal request for maintaining part of the service in-house. Aim of managing the supplier’s service quality	The service users were heard and cost estimations were made. The supplier selection was made from a framework agreement which demolished the need of preliminary research	Decision was made by board of directors. Project team for competitive tendering and supplier selection. The project team was mismanaged and the process prolonged The decision making process was followed through in a few months	The administrative director responsible for the service delivery prepared the decision by hearing internal service users. The procurement team and external consultants participated in supplier selection
Company D	Budget discipline, need for better management of volume variations and suppliers	Benchmarking and mapping potential suppliers in the market	Formal decision-making process. A project team with steering. An external consultant to provide benchmarking connections and data	The project team consisted of roles responsible for service content, supplier relations, development, purchasing, business control and HR. The project had a steering group
Agency D	Significant increase in service volume	Mapping of potential suppliers and costs. Benchmarking has not been a significant data source due to a lack of target organizations	The original outsourcing decision was executed by few executives in the agency. The reevaluations have been followed through according to the guiding principles	The projects teams have consisted of lawyers, roles from finance and service content and procurement specialists.

Case organization	Trigger of outsourcing consideration	Preliminary research	Structure and length of the decision-making process	Roles involved in the process
Company A	Changes in the business sector. Their philosophy is to evaluate the outsourcing of all service functions. Concern about maintaining current cost and quality levels	Data collection and preliminary tenders (cost levels) from potential suppliers. Analysis of internal cost levels. Benchmarking with other companies. Risk analysis	A structured model combining project model and sourcing process. The project had a steering group making the final decisions. Decision-making criteria were weighted numericallyThe process took almost a year	The persons responsible for internal service delivery and representatives from sourcing and finance. HR director had a steering role
City A	Dysfunctional internal service function. Need to extend the service content	Exchanging ideas of service content with potential suppliers. Analysis of suppliers’ cost level, internal cost unknown. Benchmarking with public organizations	There is no structured project model. The decision-making authorities are determined in the city’s guiding principleThe process took approximately one year	HR director and person responsible for internal service delivery. Later, the directing doctor replaced with a consultant specializing in occupational health care
Company B	Restructured ownership arrangements and a new CEO. Issues with the balance sheet	Potential suppliers and their cost levels were mapped. Some benchmarking, but the CEO mainly relied on his personal experiences	No established model for the process. Most decisions are made “ad hoc.” Board of directors approval needed above a certain investment levelThe decision-making process took approximately four months	The CEO prepared the decision alone and informed the board of directors
Municipality B	Need for better cost monitoring. Need to expand the service content	Potential suppliers and their cost levels mapped. Benchmarking with other municipalities	The process model for investments was implemented. The decision-making authorities are determined in the guiding principle of the municipality	The CFO prepared the decision alone, but the decision was made by the city council
Company C	Analysis of service production and benchmarking within the corporate group. Increased volumes of the service produced internally	Mapping of potential suppliers by requests for information including cost levels. Benchmarking within the corporate group. Risk analysis	A project was formed given the significance of the volume. Company management model determines decision-making authority. Decision-making process took nine month	Representation from logistics, head of service delivery, representatives from most significant internal customer units. Project owner was the CTO
Agency C	Internal request for maintaining part of the service in-house. Aim of managing the supplier’s service quality	The service users were heard and cost estimations were made. The supplier selection was made from a framework agreement which demolished the need of preliminary research	Decision was made by board of directors. Project team for competitive tendering and supplier selection. The project team was mismanaged and the process prolongedThe decision making process was followed through in a few months	The administrative director responsible for the service delivery prepared the decision by hearing internal service users. The procurement team and external consultants participated in supplier selection
Company D	Budget discipline, need for better management of volume variations and suppliers	Benchmarking and mapping potential suppliers in the market	Formal decision-making process. A project team with steering. An external consultant to provide benchmarking connections and data	The project team consisted of roles responsible for service content, supplier relations, development, purchasing, business control and HR. The project had a steering group
Agency D	Significant increase in service volume	Mapping of potential suppliers and costs. Benchmarking has not been a significant data source due to a lack of target organizations	The original outsourcing decision was executed by few executives in the agency. The reevaluations have been followed through according to the guiding principles	The projects teams have consisted of lawyers, roles from finance and service content and procurement specialists.

Note:

HR = Human resources