The Outsourcing Lists
In the world of publishing, lists have universal appeal. Not only are they useful to the publisher, the reader, and the advertiser; but they also serve as important benchmarks for the industry to be able to compare and contrast differing viewpoints. While some of the lists such as the Fortune 500 go on to achieve iconic status, others constantly strive to improve the standing of their respective lists. Credit is due to both categories because the former has to sustain the rigor of its methodology, and even continuously innovate on the presentation of its list, whereas the latter makes a constant attempt to climb up the ladder of credibility.
The practice of list-making is quite democratic and pluralistic. There is place for many lists in an industry to co-exist. But the game starts getting dirty when one list starts a mudslinging match against the others. And that’s what happening in the lists that pervade the global outsourcing industry.
In a petty and devious attempt to denounce the credibility of IAOP’s Global Outsourcing 100 list and Global Services 100 list, the so-called Black Book of Outsourcing is distributing a document that unfairly and wrongly compares the three lists. The grossly fallacious document, falsely attributed to the CIO magazine, conveniently paints a glorified picture of the Black Book.
This is a deliberate attempt to mislead the industry. Such acts of profanity create confusion in the minds of customers and providers. In a desperate attempt to get visibility, the Black Book is not only robbing the other lists of their sanctity but also its own list. We are not saying that the Black Book list is all wrong; but what they are saying about the others and the means they are resorting to, is woefully inept.
We would leave it to the reader to decide which list to follow and which one to ignore.
Very nice!!