From the Editor: Outflanking Outsourcing

Outsourcing is never far from the minds of in-plant managers. The concern that an outside print provider may approach upper management with a proposal keeps in-plants focused on providing quick-turnaround, top-quality, high-value service.

But threats can come from inside as well. A new VP itching to make his mark can simply decide to close a well-run shop. It happened just a few months ago in Missouri to an award-winning in-plant with a $500,000 surplus. (That won’t turn out well for customers.)

In other cases, however, some simple education and the use of industry data has saved targeted in-plants. One example is Colorado State University. For years, its in-plant was part of marketing and communications, but it wasn’t well supported. Old equipment wasn’t replaced, and operators didn’t get much encouragement. Eventually, marketing proposed outsourcing printing. After all, they assumed, aren’t most universities outsourcing it?

But then the vice president of university operations caught wind of this and approached central receiving, which includes bulk mail. Director Steve Burn was flabbergasted. He had long thought printing should be combined with mail, and he felt that by outsourcing it, the university would lose a key strength. He asked for time to put together a proposal.

At that point, he approached me looking for data and articles illustrating the power of in-plants. I had plenty to give him. I shared IPI research reports, articles detailing the nightmare other schools experienced after outsourcing and how they later brought printing back in-house, and profiles of similar universities with thriving in-plants. Steve used this data to create a website listing the pros of insourcing, the cons of outsourcing, peer universities with in-plants, and links to outsourcing failure stories and IPI research.

His efforts paid off. He showed the university it was wrong to think outsourcing was a trend at other schools. He even got marketing to realize that by outsourcing, it would cede control over the appearance of university branding to an external printer.

Thanks to Steve’s efforts, the in-plant was transferred to central receiving, where it now works in conjunction with mail. This paid off when the in-plant’s 27-year-old folder died, and work was simply shifted to bulk mail’s folder to get a big job out on time. Steve then found funding to replace that folder, which surprised the operators, who had never gotten any new equipment before.

This new, supportive structure has rejuvenated the team. They’re more productive, have a better attitude, and are learning new skills. There are now plans to hire a print and mail manager to focus on the in-plant.

This success story provides a couple lessons: When people say things like “everyone’s outsourcing,” challenge them with data, which you can easily find on the IPI site. And also, supporting your staff will improve morale, resulting in better service and higher productivity. Think about how you can do this better in your in-plant.