Assisted DIY Model for GCCs in India

The terms generally describe the same approach. Assisted Build Out, or ABO, emphasizes that a specialist partner supports the GCC build. Assisted DIY emphasizes that the enterprise owns the operation while receiving local execution support. Contract scope should define the exact responsibilities.

The client’s India entity normally issues employment contracts and acts as the legal employer. SansoviGCC may manage recruitment, onboarding, payroll administration, attendance, and other workforce processes where included in the engagement.

The intended ownership structure should be documented through employment agreements, invention assignments, vendor contracts, technology licenses, and information-security controls. Intellectual-property ownership should not be assumed from the engagement-model name alone.

The schedule depends on entity requirements, regulatory processing, leadership and specialist hiring, workspace customization, technology integration, security reviews, and client approval speed. SansoviGCC creates an engagement-specific plan after discovery rather than promising one universal launch date.

Cost depends on headcount, role mix, city, workspace, technology, hiring scope, compliance requirements, service levels, and engagement duration. The proposal should distinguish initial build fees, recurring services, workspace costs, recruitment charges, technology expenses, and pass-through professional costs.

Under Assisted DIY, the client owns the India entity from the beginning. Under BOT, the provider typically builds and operates the centre before transferring the agreed operation to the client. Assisted DIY favors immediate ownership; BOT favors a more provider-led initial phase.

Yes. The client can retain selected SansoviGCC services after launch, including talent operations, workspace, technology support, learning, governance, and operating analytics. The service scope can change as the client builds its own India leadership and operating functions.