Contact centre consulting

Independent advice before you choose an outsourcing partner

Not every organisation should outsource its contact centre. We test the business case and say what the evidence supports, including when outsourcing isn't the right move yet.

Everyone has an opinion on outsourcing. Evidence is harder to come by.

'Just outsource it' is usually said in a meeting where nobody has costed the alternative. Sometimes it's the right call. Just as often, the case gets built backwards: from a board's answer, a competitor's move or a leader's hunch. Other times the organisation already has an outsourced team in place, a BPO or business process outsourcing provider, and it isn't performing. Nobody is certain whether the fault sits with the partner, the brief, or the process underneath.

The Cattalyst doesn't operate a contact centre, so this work sits ahead of any delivery relationship. We start by understanding your operation and testing the business case. Where a partner genuinely is the right next step, we match your requirements against a global network of 43 contact centre partners spanning the Caribbean, North America, the United Kingdom, South Africa and international markets. The advice starts from what your organisation needs. Which site has room to fill isn't the driver.

That includes telling you plainly when outsourcing isn't the right move, or isn't the right move yet. Some engagements never reach a partner conversation at all. The fix stays inside your existing operation: a business case, a process, a technology decision made before anyone asked what problem it was solving. Where an outsourced relationship already exists and isn't working, we apply the same approach: test what's underneath before assuming the partner needs replacing.

Where outsourcing decisions usually go wrong

If more than one of these feels familiar, the evidence is usually the missing piece.

  • Outsourcing becomes the answer before there's a question

    A board asks why costs are rising, a competitor went offshore first, or a leader has a hunch, and outsourcing gets agreed before anyone has costed the alternative.

  • An existing BPO isn't performing, and nobody can say why

    Service levels are missed and nobody is certain whether the cause is the partner's capability, the original brief, or an operating model that never fit the work.

  • Metrics that look fine while the customer experience doesn't

    Average handling time and occupancy sit inside target while complaints, repeat contacts and churn tell a different story about the customer experience.

  • Technology bought before the process was understood

    A platform gets purchased to fix a problem nobody has mapped, so the new system ends up automating the same broken handoffs, just a little faster.

  • RFPs written by procurement, without anyone who runs a queue

    The RFP, request for proposal, gets built around cost per contact, with no input from anyone who's run a floor, so responses answer the wrong brief well.

  • Staffing and volume decisions made on instinct

    Headcount, shift patterns and channel mix get set by what feels right this quarter, without the forecasting or workforce planning that would show whether the model can hold.

  • Nobody owns the relationship once the contract is signed

    Selection gets real attention and real hours. Once the partner is live, performance against the original brief goes unmonitored until something breaks badly enough to notice.

What the advisory work can cover

Not every engagement touches every area: these are the building blocks, matched to what your organisation is trying to decide.

Working out if outsourcing is the right call

  • Outsourcing readiness assessment
  • Business case development
  • Customer journey review
  • KPI review

What the current operation is doing

  • Contact centre review
  • Process mapping
  • Quality frameworks
  • Training review

The operating model underneath

  • Operating model design
  • Technology review
  • Workforce planning

Selecting a partner

  • BPO procurement and RFP support
  • Vendor selection and pricing analysis
  • Location strategy

Multivendor and existing relationships

  • Multivendor strategy
  • Provider performance review and existing-BPO remediation
  • Transition planning

Who this is built for

  • CEOs and COOs weighing outsourcing for the first time
  • CFOs who need the business case tested before it reaches the board
  • CX and contact centre leaders who inherited an underperforming BPO
  • HR and operations leaders scoping an RFP before it goes to market
  • Organisations running more than one vendor with no shared strategy across them
  • Leaders who bought technology without fixing the process underneath
  • Businesses that outsourced once, got it wrong, and want a second attempt done properly
  • Boards and leadership teams who want an independent recommendation

How the advisory work runs

The work runs in a straight line, from understanding your operation to a recommendation grounded in evidence, with support to see it through whichever direction it points.

  1. Understand the operation

    We spend time learning how the business runs day to day: volumes, channels, the customer journey, and what leaders and frontline staff say when nobody senior is in the room.

  2. Assess against evidence

    A structured review covers what's there: the contact centre or BPO, the metrics, the technology, the process, each one tested against the evidence.

  3. Recommend, including when the answer is no

    The recommendation is grounded in what the assessment found: sometimes a case for outsourcing, sometimes 'don't outsource this', stated plainly even when it isn't the answer anyone expected.

  4. Support selection or remediation

    Where outsourcing is right, that's support through procurement and partner selection. Where the relationship is the issue, that rigour goes into fixing the setup, not replacing the partner.

  5. Stay through transition

    We stay involved while a new partner goes live or a remediated relationship beds in, so the recommendation gets tested against what happens instead of sitting on a shelf.

Asked before you ask

Straight answers, and a discovery call for everything else.

Are you tied to the partners you recommend?

No single facility is being sold to you. A recommendation follows your requirements, and spare capacity has nothing to do with it. Where a commercial arrangement exists with a partner, that's discussed with you openly rather than left for you to find out later. If a candidate partner is wrong for the work, that gets said regardless.

Can you review our current BPO without moving us to a different provider?

Yes, and it's a common starting point. A lot of what looks like a partner problem turns out to be a brief, a process or a metric problem sitting underneath the relationship. Remediation is often the right answer, and replacing the provider is never assumed as the outcome before the review has happened.

If we go through the assessment, do we have to buy outsourcing afterwards?

No. The recommendation follows the evidence, and sometimes the evidence points away from outsourcing altogether, or toward fixing something in-house first. This is advisory work, not the first step of a sale.

What if the review finds that outsourcing genuinely isn't right for us?

Then that's the recommendation, stated plainly, with the reasoning behind it. It's a legitimate outcome of this work. Some organisations aren't at the stage, scale or process maturity where outsourcing would help yet.

Do you write the RFP for us, or just advise on it?

Both, depending on what's needed. Some organisations want the RFP built and run for them; others already have procurement capability and want operational input added to a document that would otherwise be written without it. Which one fits gets agreed during discovery.

Related insights

View all insights

Get an independent read before choosing a provider

Tell Oliver what's driving the outsourcing conversation: pressure, a business case, or a partner that isn't working. Get a straight assessment of what the evidence supports.