Square peg in a round hole?

McKC had got partner-level support, but it didn’t have any customers. Offices didn’t see the value in participating, while the local R&I staff was naturally insecure. McKC identified the London and Sydney offices as its pilot customers because there was a genuine gap there which it could seek to fulfill. These were large offices, whose local R&I teams were not able to meet the demand. Their R&I teams, too, were less insecure about giving up some of their work because they were overworked and looked forward to getting some work off their back.

In fact, demand took some time to build up. The first few months were extremely slack, with staff pouncing on any work that came their way. McKC decide to ‘pull’ work its way. It got implants from the Sydney and London offices, who gradually began to siphon work to India. What sustained the initial trickle was the quality of output that the team delivered, and what began to feed McKC was the realization that the team could handle analyses and the word of mouth publicity that the center got from satisfied customers. And within six months, volume ceased to be an issue.

As consultants began to circumnavigate their local R&Is, McKC had to respond to the local teams-after all these were the people who’s jobs were being affected. At an operations level to gain buy-in, McKC started to respond to the consultants’ queries with a copy to the local office, thereby keeping them in the loop. At a managerial level, Kirkland called an R&I managers’ meet, where the McKC team took a stand of candor-“We are starting with only 10 to 12 people. There is no threat because this will be your back office. We will see how to help it grow after piloting the service for the next six to 12 months.”

Secrets behind the success

McKC outdid its projections. In the first year, it had planned to service two offices. It ended up servicing almost 60. It had planned a 10-member team; it ended up requiring a 45 member one. It had planned to do almost 100 per cent low-end quick-information work; but it ended up providing significant customized information and analysis support as well.

But, what was the key factor in McKC’s success? “People,” say McKC leaders. “In the western hemisphere offices, MBAs were consultants, while librarians were R&I and there was a divide in the middle. In India, we sought to put MBAs on either side.” This was something eminently possible in India with its brood of MBA schools, people’s willingness to work in shifts, and lower wages. The hunt was for second and third-tier MBA graduates, people who were hungry to prove that they were as good or better than the first-tier MBAs. It resulted in the hiring of the first batch of ten people, handpicked from 5000 resumes that the McKC appointment ad attracted. And this team was driven by quality, believing that cost advantages are soon forgotten and matter only to the owners.

Like many success stories, McKC, too, started small, though it thought big. It tested the model with a mere ten people working from a few rooms at the Taj Palace hotel in Delhi, scaling up in staircase fashion to 20, and eventually 45 researchers and analysts by the end of the first year. It was only after 18 months of existence, and continuous demand from consultants, that it shifted to a larger office in Gurgaon, a suburb of Delhi and today a hotbed of BPO activity.

Happily ever after

Today the firm has three knowledge centers-the original one in Gurgaon, one outside Boston, and another in Brussels-servicing the three regions and the world. While the knowledge centers provide extensive support to consultants and Practices, the local R&I offices are very lean. This configuration is fairly close to the regional plan first proposed almost ten years ago-the original plan had proposed centers in India, the US, and UK.

Before and after