Managed GCC
GCC Talent & Operations
We are measured on regretted attrition at eighteen months, not on time-to-fill. Those two numbers pull in opposite directions.
A capability center is only as good as the people who stay in it. Recruiting at volume is a solved problem; recruiting at volume without quietly lowering the bar, and then keeping those people past the second year, is not.
Hiring to your bar
We calibrate against your actual standard by running joint panels early, then hold to it as volume increases. Where we cannot fill at that bar, we tell you and we discuss the trade-off - rather than filling the seat and letting you discover the difference in delivery six months later.
The year-two problem
In year one your center is invisible to the local market. By month eighteen, recruiters know exactly who works there and what they do. Attrition steps up, and the people who leave are disproportionately the ones you most wanted to keep. Career architecture, twice-yearly benchmarking and genuine progression are built in from the start, because retrofitting them after the step-up rarely works.
Running the center
Day-to-day operations against published service levels, with a governance rhythm that gives you visibility without requiring you to manage it: weekly operational reporting, monthly service review, quarterly business review covering attrition, capability, cost against model and risk.
Controls and evidence
The center's control environment is mapped to the frameworks you are already assessed under, so it reduces your audit burden rather than adding a new scope item.
What we report
- Regretted attrition at twelve and eighteen months, separated from total attrition.
- Service-level attainment, with the misses explained rather than averaged away.
- Landed cost against the original model, line by line.
What is included
-
Calibrated hiring
Joint panels early to fix the bar, then held to it as volume rises - or we tell you.
-
Retention by design
Career architecture and twice-yearly benchmarking built in before the year-two step-up.
-
Published service levels
Weekly operational reporting, monthly service review, quarterly business review.
-
Mapped controls
The control environment aligned to frameworks you are already assessed under.
Common questions
Before you ask
No. Most engagements start with either an assessment or a co-managed arrangement where we take tickets and after-hours while your team keeps everything else. Expanding from there is a decision you make with two quarters of evidence rather than a sales promise.
Per user per month for the recurring service, with servers and sites priced separately. Project work, migrations and hardware are quoted individually so the monthly fee never becomes the place surprise costs hide.
A dedicated offshore team working only for you, in an entity we set up and run to your standards. It is not a shared outsourcing pool - the people are yours, and if you want to own the entity eventually, the transfer date goes in the contract up front.
Below roughly 50 seats the governance overhead usually eats the saving. Between 50 and 150 it works if the work is coherent enough to justify dedicated leadership. Above 150 the economics are almost always favourable if retention holds.
Frequently, and it is one of the arrangements that works best. We agree a written split of responsibilities before starting so nothing lands in the gap between two teams, and we work inside your ticketing system rather than making you adopt ours.
Related
Often bought together
Managed IT Services
Monitoring, patching and service desk - plus managed application services for the ERP and legacy systems your business actually runs on.
ExploreCo-Managed IT & Help Desk
Your internal team keeps the strategy and the relationships; we take the tickets, the nights and the overflow.
ExploreCybersecurity
Managed detection and response, endpoint hardening, and the evidence your insurer and clients now demand.
ExploreReady to find out what your IT is really costing you?
A 45-minute working session gets you an honest read on estate health, security posture, and the two or three changes that would pay for themselves first.