Shell is to press ahead with its plans to outsource the majority of its IT
division, after signing three outsourcing deals worth more than $4bn over five
years.
From the 1 July 2008, AT&T will look after Shell’s network and
telecommunications, while T-Systems takes care of its hosting and storage, and
EDS will maintain Shell’s end-user computing services.
Advertisement
Rumours of the move first emerged online in January, although the reports of
large scale redundancies look to be wide of the mark. Instead Shell has
announced it will transfer its 3,600 IT staff directly to the service providers.
In UK, 86 IT staff will move to EDS, 30 to T-Systems and 17 to AT&T, said
a UK spokeswoman. No staff will be moved outside of the UK though, she added.
"Shell’s approach combines all the advantages of decentralised service
provision with the benefits and efficiency of a centralised governance
structure," said Elesh Khakhar of outsourcing services firm TPI, which advised
on the deals.
The company said the moves were part of its major restructuring programme.
Shell aims to shave around $500m of its annual operating costs.
But cost-cutting was likely to be of secondary importance in outsourcing its
IT, said IT industry pundit Mark Kobayashi Hillary. “To be honest, the decision
is not to create immediate cost reductions but to bring future certainty. Now
the risks lie with suppliers and Shell knows the costs of its IT upfront,” he
said.
“It just means Shell will have to manage a large scale change management
programme,” he said. “All the staff will be doing the same job but there will
just be more checks and balances put in place.”
Shell is following the growing trend of using a multi-sourcing approach for
large IT outsourcing deal. "This allows businesses to target best-of-breed
partners," said Brian Stones, executive vice president of Indian outsourcing
provider Patni.
"Multi-sourcing deals provide clients with the opportunity to select the best
in breed for different business areas, keep suppliers on their toes by
benchmarking performance against each other regularly and avoid the risk of
being tied to one underperforming supplier over a long period," he added.
Do you agree?
Have your say on this article