A business case that survives year two
Most offshore business cases are built to be approved rather than to be true. This template is built for the second year, when somebody compares the projection against the actuals.
A working model, not a marketing document
It walks your finance and leadership team through a fully loaded cost model, including the components that are usually missing and that surface between month nine and month twenty four.
The problem with most capability centre business cases is not arithmetic, it is completeness. They are rarely wrong about salary, which is the number everyone scrutinises. They are almost always missing the costs that arrive as consumed time rather than spend, or that land in a different budget from the one under review.
Eighteen months later the actuals do not match the projection, and the centre spends its second year defending a number it did not choose rather than demonstrating what it built. This template is designed to prevent that specific outcome.
The sections of the template
Baseline capture worksheet
What the work costs and produces today, recorded before anything moves. This is the only moment these numbers are uncontested, and it is the section most often skipped.
Fully loaded cost model
All ten cost components separated into fixed and per head, including entity and compliance, ramp, transfer drag, onshore management overhead and replacement cost.
Productivity ramp curve
A month by month contribution assumption per hire rather than a switch, so the first year projection matches what actually happens.
Three case scenarios
Conservative, expected and favourable, with the assumptions that drive the difference named explicitly rather than buried.
Failure conditions
What would have to be true for this to have been the wrong decision. Stating these yourself is what distinguishes a business case from a proposal.
Quarterly true-up sheet
The reconciliation you run each quarter in year one, restating actuals against model and recording the reason for each variance.
The line items that break business cases
These are the components most commonly missing from the original case, and the reason a headline saving fails to reconcile later.
| Cost component | Usually in the original case? | When it surfaces |
|---|---|---|
| Salary and statutory benefits | Always | Month 1 |
| Entity, compliance and audit | Sometimes | Month 1, then annually |
| Workspace and infrastructure | Sometimes | Month 1 |
| Recruitment cost | Sometimes | Month 1 to 6 |
| Ramp cost before productive output | Rarely | Month 1 to 6, and every expansion |
| Knowledge transfer drag | Almost never | Month 1 to 6, in another budget |
| Onshore management overhead | Almost never | Continuous, highest in year one |
| Attrition and replacement | Almost never | From around month 9 |
The bottom four are the ones that turn a modelled saving into a disputed one. All four are foreseeable, and none of them appear on an invoice.
Use it before you commit, not after
Finance leaders
Who will own the arithmetic and be asked to defend it when the actuals arrive in the second year.
Engineering leaders
Who will be held to whatever number the case contains, and who benefit most from it being achievable.
Executive sponsors
Who will present it, and who need the failure conditions named up front rather than discovered in a board meeting.
One thing to do before you open it. Capture the baseline this week. It takes about a week and it is only available before the work moves. Afterwards every comparison becomes an argument between people with different interests in the answer.
A sequence, not a form to fill in once
The template is most useful worked through in order, because later sections depend on decisions made in earlier ones.
Capture the baseline
Fully loaded cost of the work as done today, plus trailing four quarters of throughput. Circulate it so it cannot be renegotiated later.
Build the fully loaded model
All ten cost components, fixed costs separated from per head, ramp modelled as a curve rather than a switch.
Build three cases
Conservative, expected and favourable, with the assumptions driving the difference stated on the same page as the numbers.
Write the failure conditions
What would have to be true for this to be the wrong decision. This is the section people skip and the one that protects the case most.
Run the quarterly true-up
Reconcile actuals against the model each quarter in year one, and record the reason for every variance rather than only the number.
With the template versus without it
The comparison that matters is not whether a business case gets approved. It is whether it is still defensible eighteen months later.
| Typical case without it | Built with this template | |
|---|---|---|
| Cost comparison basis | Unloaded domestic salary vs fully loaded offshore | Fully loaded on both sides |
| Ramp assumption | Full output from month one | A modelled curve to steady state |
| Onshore management time | Omitted | Estimated and included |
| Attrition | Assumed zero | Modelled from year one |
| Presentation | A single number | A range with named assumptions |
| Failure conditions | Not stated | Stated explicitly, before anyone asks |
| Year two outcome | Defending an unrealistic number | Reconciling against a model built to be reconciled |
None of the rows on the right require more optimism. They require completeness, which is the entire function of the template.
Frequently asked questions
Is this a sales document?
No. It is a working model designed to produce a defensible number, including one that may argue against building a capability centre. If the honest model says the case is marginal, that is worth knowing before you commit rather than after.
Do we need to share our numbers with you to use it?
No. It is a template you run internally with your own figures. If you want a second read on the assumptions we are glad to give one, but that is optional and separate.
What if we already have a business case?
Run it against the ten cost components and the ramp curve. In practice most existing cases are missing ramp, transfer drag, onshore management overhead and attrition, and adding those four is usually the difference between a case that reconciles and one that does not.
Will the saving look smaller?
Almost certainly, and that is the point. A smaller number you can defend is worth considerably more than a larger one you will spend the second year explaining.
How long does it take to complete?
Two to four weeks for the modelling, plus a week for baseline capture, which should run first. The baseline week is the part most often skipped and the part that determines whether anything else can be proven later.
Does it cover the value case as well as cost?
It covers cost quantitatively and prompts you to state the value case as specific named outcomes rather than a modelled figure. Attaching invented numbers to strategic value damages the credibility of the whole document.
Related reading
Request the business case template
Tell us where you are in the decision and we will send the template along with a note on which sections matter most for your situation.