Free Strategy Call

Book Your Call

One call. Clear direction. Faster execution.

Case StudySoftware & Services·GCC Location Research

How a US company chose where to build its global capability centre, 2 locations from a shortlist of 6.

Skillfi mapped talent, costs, suppliers and the local ecosystem in six cities, interviewed 30 people on the ground and built a scorecard leadership could agree on. The first centre hit its savings target five months early. It's how our fractional research team supports big location decisions.

Months to savings target
12→7
$2.4MSavings risk avoided
120Roles filled in 6 months
−18%3-year cost vs the default hub
01

A big, hard-to-reverse decision, made on opinions.

The company planned to build a global capability centre of more than 400 people for engineering, data, finance operations and customer support within three years. Each centre would cost around $900,000 to set up and more than $8 million a year to run, so choosing the wrong location would be expensive and slow to undo.

Leadership was split. Some wanted the obvious, established hubs, others pushed for lower-cost cities. The shortlist had six locations across India, the Philippines, Poland and Mexico, but no shared data on talent, real costs or the local ecosystem. Most of what the team had came from vendors with something to sell.

6candidate locations
$900Kto set up each centre
$8M+a year to run at scale

Every vendor told us their city was the obvious choice. We needed evidence, not a sales pitch.

CFO, client
02

Score the whole ecosystem, not just salaries.

Cheap salaries mean little if people leave within a year or the right vendors aren't there. We agreed the scoring weights with leadership before collecting any data, then tested every number against people running centres in each city. Entity and employment questions were reviewed with our legal and compliance partners.

Talent

Supply, attrition and pay trends

Graduate and experienced talent pools for each role family, attrition rates and how fast pay was rising in every city.

Ecosystem

Who else is there, and what support exists

Universities and training partners, competing GCCs, government incentives and special economic zones, time-zone overlap, and 30 interviews with GCC leaders, HR heads and recruiters.

Suppliers & cost

Vendors and a 3-year cost model

Office and flexible workspace, employer-of-record and payroll partners, recruiters and IT vendors scored in each city, rolled into a 3-year total cost of ownership.

The Engagement

Eight weeks, week by week

From a divided leadership team to a single, evidence-backed decision. Here's how the study unfolded.

  1. Week 1

    Criteria & weights

    Leadership agreed what mattered most, and how much, before any location data was shared.

    5 weighted criteria
  2. Week 2–3

    Talent & cost data

    Talent supply, attrition, pay levels and pay inflation gathered for every role family in every city.

    6 locations
  3. Week 3–4

    Ecosystem & vendor mapping

    Universities, competing GCCs, incentives and the local supplier network mapped and scored.

    Vendors scored
  4. Week 5–6

    Interviews on the ground

    Conversations with GCC leaders, HR heads, recruiters and vendors to check the data against real experience.

    30 interviews
  5. Week 7

    3-year cost model

    Salaries, real estate, setup, vendors and expected pay inflation combined into a total cost for each location.

    Cost per location
  6. Week 8

    Scorecard & decision

    Every location scored side by side, with a clear recommendation that leadership approved in a single meeting.

    2 locations chosen
Inside the Location Scorecard

How the six locations compared

Each city was scored on talent, cost, ecosystem, risk and speed to scale. The winners weren't the cheapest or the biggest. They were the best fit for each role.

HyderabadChosen

Engineering & data

  • Deep engineering talent pool
  • Lower attrition than nearby hubs
  • Strong vendor network
KrakówChosen

Finance ops & EU support

  • Finance & language skills
  • European-hours coverage
  • EU-ready suppliers
BengaluruRuled out

Too much competition

  • 30%+ attrition from other GCCs
  • Fast pay inflation
  • ~$2.4M of savings at risk
Runners-upKept warm

Pune, Manila, Guadalajara

  • Pune: engineering fallback
  • Manila: support at scale
  • Guadalajara: US time-zone option
Next: Phase 2 options ready to goRunner-up locations, vendor shortlists and cost models were kept up to date, so the company can add a third centre without starting the research again.
Month 3 · First hires in Hyderabad Month 6 · 120 roles filled Month 7 · Savings target hit
The Results

The first year of the new centres

Months to reach the cost-savings target

Original plan12 months
Actual, first centre7 months
051015 months

The right location meant faster hiring, lower attrition and savings five months early.

3-year cost vs the default hub—→−18%
Savings risk avoided—→$2.4M
Roles filled in the first 6 months—→120
Time-to-hire vs plan—→−35%
Leadership alignmentSplit→Unanimous
CE

We walked into the board meeting with a scorecard instead of opinions. The decision took one meeting, and the numbers have held up since.

CEO, client
Your Turn

Planning a global capability centre?

Our fractional research team will map talent, costs and the local ecosystem across your shortlist and give you a scorecard your leadership can agree on. Once you've chosen, a fractional recruiter can hire your first wave and we can set up your global HRIS.

What we'd build for you
  • Talent & ecosystem data for every location
  • A vendor & supplier map
  • A 3-year total cost model
  • A weighted scorecard & recommendation
Book a Strategy Call

30 minutes. No obligation.

Let’s Work Together

Contact Us

Sit back, relax. We will get back to you soon.

Related Case Studies