Director of Service Delivery Guide:
Shared Services & GBS

Navigating the technology landscape for Service Delivery can be overwhelming. The market is fragmented between massive ERP ecosystems, specialized Service Management platforms, and niche point solutions. Here is a neutral, educational overview of how to evaluate these approaches.

1. The Platform Approach (e.g., ServiceNow, BMC, Salesforce)

• Concept: An 'engagement layer' that sits on top of your systems of record (ERPs like SAP/Oracle). It acts as the connective tissue for intake, routing, and workflow.

• Pros: Unified visibility across towers (IT, HR, Finance); excellent user experience; strong reporting.

• Cons: Higher licensing costs; requires implementation expertise.

• Best For: Mature GBS organizations managing multiple towers who need a 'single pane of glass.'

2. The ERP-Native Approach (e.g., SAP Shared Services Framework)

• Concept: Leveraging modules within your existing ERP to handle service requests.

• Pros: Deep integration with transactional data; lower 'new vendor' friction.

• Cons: Often poor user interface for non-finance users; rigid workflows; difficult to extend to HR or Legal.

• Best For: Finance-only shared services heavily dependent on a single ERP instance.

3. Point Solutions & Best-of-Breed

• Concept: Buying specific tools for specific problems (e.g., a ticketing tool for IT, a separate case management tool for HR, a specialized tool for AP automation).

• Pros: specialized functionality; often lower initial cost; faster to deploy per team.

• Cons: Creates 'data silos'—you cannot see the total cost to serve; integration nightmares; disjointed employee experience.

• Best For: Small, single-function shared services or early-stage startups.

Build vs. Buy Considerations

• The Trap: Many Directors are tempted to 'build' a custom portal using internal IT resources (e.g., on SharePoint or PowerApps).

• The Reality: Internal builds often lack maintenance budgets. Two years later, the code is brittle, the original developer has left, and the tool is 'technical debt.'

• Recommendation: Buy for core capabilities (ticketing, routing, knowledge); Build for 'last mile' unique differentiators (custom reports, specific connector apps).

Evaluation Criteria Checklist

When selecting tools, ask vendors these critical questions:

1. Multi-Geo Compliance: 'Does this platform support data residency requirements for China and the EU out of the box?'

2. No-Code/Low-Code: 'Can my business analysts modify workflows without IT support?' (Crucial for agility).

3. GenAI Roadmap: 'How are you using AI to categorize intake and suggest resolutions?'

4. Integration: 'Show me exactly how this connects to our ERP. Is it a pre-built connector or a custom API project?'

FAQs

What is the typical ROI timeline for a Service Delivery transformation?

While operational stability often improves within 3-4 months, financial ROI typically materializes between months 9 and 15. The initial phase involves investment in tools and training (negative ROI). The 'break-even' point occurs when ticket deflection (self-service) and automation rates rise, allowing you to handle increased volume without adding headcount. According to industry benchmarks, mature GBS models eventually deliver 30-40% operational cost savings compared to decentralized models, but this requires patience through the initial 'J-curve' of implementation.

How do we handle business stakeholders who refuse to use the new ticketing system?

Resistance is normal. Do not simply mandate the tool; sell the benefit. Position the new intake model as a 'Fast Lane.' Guarantee that tickets submitted through the portal have a stricter SLA (e.g., 4 hours) compared to email (e.g., 24 hours). Additionally, use 'Email-to-Case' technology initially so their behavior doesn't have to change immediately, but the backend process is structured. Over time, use the data to show them: 'Requests sent via the portal are resolved 50% faster than your emails.' Data persuades better than policy.

Should we build our own portal or buy a platform like ServiceNow/Salesforce?

For 95% of organizations, 'Buy' is the superior choice. Building a custom portal on SharePoint or PowerApps seems cheaper initially but creates significant 'technical debt.' You become responsible for security patching, mobile compatibility, and feature updates. Platforms like ServiceNow or Salesforce invest billions in R&D (AI, integration, security) that your internal IT team cannot match. Buy the platform for the plumbing (workflow, routing, security) and configure the 'last mile' for your specific needs.

How does GenAI fit into the Service Delivery roadmap for 2025?

GenAI is no longer experimental; it is a triage necessity. In 2025, GenAI should be your 'Tier 0' support. It should sit between the intake and the analyst, reading incoming unstructured requests (emails), categorizing them, and suggesting draft responses or solutions to the agent. This 'Agent Assist' model reduces training time and improves consistency. Do not start with customer-facing chatbots if your knowledge base is poor; start with internal-facing GenAI to help your delivery teams work faster.

How do we manage the 'Atlantic Divide' between US and European operations?

Acknowledge the difference rather than forcing total uniformity. Adopt a 'Global Standards, Local Execution' framework. Agree on the 'What' (e.g., we must measure First Contact Resolution, we must use one central platform) but be flexible on the 'How' (e.g., allowing German teams to have specific approval workflows required by Works Councils). Trying to force a US-centric 'speed at all costs' model onto European teams often results in compliance failures and cultural rejection.