The document is a research memoire submitted by Vaibhav Sathe to ESCP Europe in 2012 on the topic of "Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing". It includes:
1) An introduction outlining the objectives of identifying factors affecting IP transfers in global software outsourcing and importance of client-vendor relationships.
2) An overview of distributed delivery models for outsourcing including definitions, benefits, risks, and levels of outsourcing.
3) A discussion of software development in the context of outsourcing, offshoring, and the types of contracts typically used.
4) An outline of the research methodology to be used including identifying variables from literature
1. MEMOIRE DE RECHERCHE
2011/2012
NOM et PRENOM de l’auteur 1: SATHE Vaibhav Vishwanath, E113001
SUJET DU MEMOIRE
Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing
Development of framework analyzing critical factors that impact intellectual property
transfers in global software development outsourcing scenarios
- NOM DU DIRECTEUR DE RECHERCHE: Prof. Dr. LEMAIRE Jean-Paul
La diffusion de ce recueil CONFIDENTIEL Non
est strictement réservée à
ESCP Europe.
2. Affidavit
I the undersigned, SATHE Vaibhav Vishwanath, E113001, certify on the honor that I have
not plagiarized the paper enclosed, which means that I am the only author of all the sentences
this text is composed of. Any sentence from a different author than me was written in
quotation marks, with explicit indication of its source. I am aware that by contravening to the
present rule, I break the recognised academic principles and I expose myself to the sanctions
the disciplinary committee will decide on.
I also confirm this work has never been submitted during studies prior to ESCP Europe. If
this work has been written during studies conducted in parallel, I must precise it.
The remarks written in those pages only commit me.
Paris, May-03-2012
SATHE Vaibhav Vishwanath
4. Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1
Distributed Delivery Models...................................................................................................... 3
Business Implications ............................................................................................................ 3
Outsourcing Levels ................................................................................................................ 4
Software Development........................................................................................................... 5
Outsourcing Contracts ........................................................................................................... 7
Intellectual Property ................................................................................................................... 9
IP in Products ......................................................................................................................... 9
IP in Services ....................................................................................................................... 11
Trainings .............................................................................................................................. 11
Management of IP ................................................................................................................ 12
Legal Framework ..................................................................................................................... 14
IP Laws in the world ............................................................................................................ 14
Contract Laws ...................................................................................................................... 16
Employment Contracts......................................................................................................... 17
Case Study: Pine Labs vs. Gemalto Terminals, High Court of Delhi [20] ............................ 19
Client-Vendor Relationship ..................................................................................................... 21
Trust ..................................................................................................................................... 21
Verification .......................................................................................................................... 22
Other Aspects of Interaction ................................................................................................ 23
Corporate Strategy ................................................................................................................... 26
IP due diligence.................................................................................................................... 26
Business Intelligence ........................................................................................................... 27
Research Methodology ............................................................................................................ 31
Problem Definition............................................................................................................... 31
Variables Extracted .............................................................................................................. 33
Survey Design ...................................................................................................................... 34
Survey Responses ................................................................................................................ 35
Factor Analysis Configuration ............................................................................................. 38
Factor Analysis Results........................................................................................................ 39
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 44
Managerial Implications ...................................................................................................... 44
Limitations and Future Scope .............................................................................................. 45
References ................................................................................................................................ 47
Appendix-I: SPSS Outputs ...................................................................................................... 50
5. Executive Summary
The objective of this study was to identify factors that affect Intellectual property
Transfer in global software outsourcing scenario. The study also aimed at establishing
relative importance of these factors based on variance in expert opinion.
The report begins with overview of software outsourcing and offshoring models. It
explains managerial implications and benefits vs. risks involved. After discussing types of
contracts in outsourcing, the scenario with software is specifically discussed. The term
Intellectual property is then defined with its application with respect to both software product
and service sectors. Then the report establishes IP management approach. We then proceed
with brief discussion on legal background and framework and establish how it varies in
critical countries like USA, EU and India from software outsourcing point of view. A sample
case study elaborating importance of legal understanding and intricacies of contract is also
discussed.
Report then proceeds with defining role of trust between partners and discussed
various aspects of interaction between employees of two organization. Report discussed
various factors that impact the communication and possible impact on smooth IP transfers
between the partners. Report then discusses aspects from corporate strategy and defines role
of corporate intelligence, IP due diligence in safeguarding company’s interests regards to
intellectual property.
After compiling list of all important variables, a primary expert survey was conducted
in order to derive underlying factors using statistical summarization techniques. A
summarization exercise reduced 39 variables into 13 factors among three aspects – Legal,
Human Resources and Corporate Strategy. The explained variability helps companies decide
the priority of the factors.
6. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 1
Introduction
Business landscape is changing at dramatically high speed today, thanks to modern
technological developments especially in communication and computation areas.
Competition has naturally exploded in its dynamic environment as traditional barriers have
weakened and new opportunities have risen. This has created need of absolute efficiency in
business environment. Companies have started focusing on their core competencies
entrusting other activities to vendors specializing in those. That’s why we can see that in
today’s businesses activities like recruitment, IT infrastructure & maintenance, internal
payroll & accounting, supply of raw material are increasingly done by contractors. This
allows the firm to focus on core business areas where it takes on head on with its competitors.
[3]
Simple and largest examples of it can be of Apple . It designs and markets devices like
iPhone and iPad employing around 60,000 employees worldwide. But it has outsourced the
task of manufacturing to Taiwan based Foxconn Group which employees over 800,000 in its
factories which manufacture several hundred millions of these devices every year. Then
Apple has contracted large oceanic freight services which ship these devices to retail shops
owned by Apple or partners across the globe. Naturally, a computer company Apple has no
expertise in running hardware manufacturing plants, worker management, operational
management and transport. By negotiating best prices in advance, Apple can delegate these
tasks to vendors which have expertise and ability to deliver as per mobile manufactures
design requirements. This frees up large amount of Apple resources which are dedicated to
activities like designing new devices, develop software and applications, run marketing
campaigns and manage relationships with carriers, retailers and partners. From competition
standpoint, these activities matter to the company and not way in which it is manufactured or
transported. Apple registers hundreds of patents while designing these devices. But, when
7. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 2
Foxconn or any other supplier manufactures these devices based on these technologies, can
we believe that they learn nothing about it? Isn’t it possible that outsourcing vendors and
employees get massive knowledge of specifications, techniques and know-how of making
these devices? While company focusses on core expertise for competitive reasons, the ways
employed pose risk that the same technology, same intellectual capital can fall into hands of
competitor. It is known that Foxconn not only manufactures Apple handsets but also has
large manufacturing contracts from Apple contractors namely, Samsung, Motorola, Microsoft
and Nokia. So, how does Apple trust Foxconn with its ultimate intellectual secret? What are
benefits companies get by outsourcing? How do companies protect knowledge leaks from
their employees? Do inter-company contracts play any role? Do governments ensure such
intellectual property is protected by laws in respective countries? Do benefits of outsourcing
outweigh all the risks?
In this thesis, we will try to look at global outsourcing of software projects and
identify how companies create, identify, protect and transfer their intellectual capital. We will
identify benefits and risks in outsourcing. We will also look at various forms of project
delivery including outsourcing and offshoring. From literature survey we will identify various
variables that affect intellectual property protection in global outsourcing scenario. The
literature will include books, published journal papers, case studies and articles published in
relevant area. We will conduct expert survey in order to gather opinions of people with
regards to importance of the variables. We will then run exploratory factor analysis to
summarize these variables and identify factors that affect IP protection. We will look from
both sides of clients and vendors. This study will be useful to companies worldwide which
are considering outsourcing of software products to take precautions while structuring the
outsourcing contracts.
8. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 3
Distributed Delivery Models
Introduction
Let’s look at some basic definitions related to outsourcing terms that have evolved
[2]
recently . Outsourcing means contracting out certain pre-defined tasks to third party. It is
not necessarily outside country of origin of the firm. Offshoring means getting done certain
tasks outside country of origin. Offshoring need not involve outsourcing as company itself
may open subsidiary in a foreign country. Business strategy generally includes combination
of both outsourcing and offshoring. Nearshoring means offshoring business activities to a
country which is closer to country of origin on parameters like geographical distance, culture,
language etc. This reduces significant number of management challenges encountered
otherwise in offshore team management. Multisourcing means a business strategy which is a
blend of internal and multiple external sources in order to optimize available resources.
Onshore Offshore
Insource Same firm/same country Same firm/different country
Outsource Different firm/same country Different firm/different country
Figure 1 Delivery Models
Business Implications
[2]
A variety of reasons may exist for outsourcing based on case to case . The most
critical benefit is cost savings due to economies of scale or geographical location. Next
incentive of outsourcing is translation of fixed costs to variable costs. It reduces initial
investment and instead firm makes payments on contract basis at regular intervals. Another
benefit is also the ability to concentrate on core competencies of organization by out-
contracting support functions. Many a times outsourcing is also used to address issues in
variability of resources to address immediate or short time requirements of number of
resources or particular expertise. Outsourcing or offshoring can also result in improving
9. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 4
efficiency of organization due to better relocation of resources. Offshoring provides
opportunities to tap into global talent pool, many times at cheaper cost. The flexibility gained
by organization is critical in today’s delicate condition in terms of competition or economic
outlook.
However, Outsourcing is like a double edged sword. While there are many benefits as
explained above, it also has several risks involved. In the past, profit making enterprises have
operated with a certain amount of secrecy to guard their trade secrets from rest of the world.
They also used to control a larger portion, sometimes entirely the value chain of the business.
But, with increasing number of players participating in value chains, the businesses had to
become more transparent. They have several trusted partnerships where partners have greater
visibility into internal details of organization. Among other issues is the high rate of failure of
marriage of two organizations due to variety of differences like organizational and national
cultures, business priorities and operational methods. In each business scenario, company has
to identify a win-win situation among all partners which include suppliers, clients and
contractors. This definitely complicates the managers’ job of achieving hard business goals.
Outsourcing Levels
In any business outsourcing is done at multiple tiers of operations [4] [5]. At basic level
is low-wage human capital involving unskilled or manual labor. A second level of
outsourcing involves outsourcing of standardized production tasks, a typical semi-skilled
factory labor, which adds limited value but at lower cost. A third level involves knowledge
based outsourcing which includes educated workforce in science & technology working in
state-of-art R&D facilities. The knowledge based outsourcing involves multiple stages. On
one end it is manual knowledge delivery of tasks which cannot be automated, like data entry
& processing. While on other end, it is research and development resulting into defining next
10. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 5
generation products. The intellectual capital at stake increases exponentially as you move
from lower stage to upper.
Figure 2 Interactions among stakeholders in typical outsourcing scenario
Software Development
On global scale, software development is both outsourced and offshored, primarily for
cost competitiveness. The inefficiencies in labor markets in matured economies like high
costs of living and legal requirements on benefits, working hours and holidays result in much
higher human resource costs. This forms fundamental costing for software development. But
then how do distributed teams coordinate on delivering software globally? The global fiber
optic network which powers the Internet is the fundamental enabler for this phenomenon. In
addition to improvised communication network, other factors which contribute are higher
availability of skilled, educated and English speaking workforce in developing countries like
India, China, Mexico and South East Asia. Overall, software development factors in third
stage of skilled knowledge based layer of outsourcing levels. Based on requirements of
businesses it spreads across all stages in the third layer from basic level data entry operators
to cutting edge research in areas related to computer science and information technology.
11. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 6
Typical term used for this sector is IT/ITES which comprises of Information Technology and
Information Technology Enabled Services. Information Technology Association of America
[7]
defines Information Technology as the study, design, development, implementation,
support or management of computer-based information systems, particularly software
applications and computer hardware. While ITES is defined as a form of outsourced service
which includes industries like banking, insurance, telecommunications which includes use of
modern IT evolution. Estimated size of total IT service industry was over 1.1 trillion USD [6].
IBM is the largest company in terms of market share, followed by HP and Accenture. This
industry is typically considered highly fragmented as top 4 companies control only around
12% of market. The outsourced services comprise around 48% of total IT industry which is
roughly a 500 billion dollar industry globally. The IT industry divisions as defined by
Datamonitor are as below.
Global IT Industry
Data Processing and IT Consulting & other
Outsourcing Market services
Electronic Data IT & System Integration
Processing (EDP) services
Information Technology
IT Consulting
Outsourcing (ITO)
Business Process Information Management
Outsourcing (BPO) Services
Figure 3 Organization of IT Industry
A typical outsourcing of software development may involve making of software
products or use of software products to make applications. When software products are made,
the intention of company is to sell them further in the market to monetize the investment.
12. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 7
Examples are again products like Microsoft Windows or Office in which a lot of contractors
are involved in development or testing activities. On other hand, when applications or
services are deployed using existing product, these are for sole use of client. Examples are
integration and customization of ERP like SAP for use of organization like AT&T by vendor
like IBM. Depending upon business model, a variety of ownership patterns may exist in such
business models. The bulk of outsourcing projects consist of second type i.e. development of
applications and services for purpose of running business operations of client.
Outsourcing Contracts
Typically firms participating in an outsourcing relationship sign contracts that define
terms of engagement, quality parameters of expected output and penalties in violation of the
[22]
terms . Since the contracts are typically international, they are subject to differences in
legal structures of individual home countries of the participating companies. Hence, it is
important that certain factors like following are agreed upon.
1. The contract is signed in only one language. This copy is considered as master for all
disputes. Other translated versions can be made available. This ensures that
interpretations don’t change due to translation issues.
2. The jurisdiction under which any dispute will be subject to is agreed in advance.
3. Ownership of intellectual property including geographies, rights and period is
mentioned.
4. Appropriate License of intellectual property owned by vendor but used in making the
product which is generally owned by the client.
Typically Outsourcing Contracts can be categorized into 4 types [23].
1. Time and Material Contracts:
Customer pays accepted hourly rate per resource. Typically used when vendor
company does not own the full delivery and is only providing manpower to client,
13. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 8
which is executing the project. Also, it is used in full vendor-owned models when it is
difficult to pre-estimate the cost of deliverables. The resources are billed/invoiced to
client on month or quarter basis.
2. Fixed Price Contracts:
When cost of deliverables can be accurately estimated, clients pay a fixed amount for
pre-defined requirements to be delivered in given time with given quality. Either side
needs to compensate the other for any variations in original conditions on their part.
The number of resources used by vendor is not concern of the client.
3. Revenue Share Contracts:
These are partnership contracts, where clients won’t pay vendor for making the
product. But, instead it will promise a certain share in sales. While a vendor has
significant risks in this model, if the potential product succeeds, then it would get
higher returns than it would have got in case of Fixed Price contracts.
4. Hybrid Contracts:
Hybrid contracts are those in which combinations of above models are used to hedge
the risk on either party.
14. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 9
Intellectual Property
World IP Organization [8] defines Intellectual Property (IP) as legal rights which result
from intellectual activity in the industrial, scientific, literary and artistic fields. IP rights
provide moral and economic right to the creator over his creation. It helps in establishing
trade of IP with fair pricing where IP can be put to use in social and commercial development
where original creators are justly compensated. Some of the common ways in which state
governs IP are trademarks, copyright and patents. Although there is great amount of
heterogeneity in legislations and enforcement levels across countries. It is considered that in
matured markets of North America and Western Europe, the Intellectual Property laws are
more matured compared to emerging economies like India and China where these are in
nascent stage. However, enforcements of these laws have remained a continuous challenge
for companies across the globe.
IP in Products
In this section we will discuss typical intellectual property that gets exposed in
software outsourcing contracts. As defined by A. Story [9], the software is of two fundamental
types with respect to intellectual property protection. First is Proprietary Software, in which
software code is under private ownership of creator which can be individual developer or the
company employing the developer. We will see in next section how employers govern IP
created by their employees. Most common example of proprietary software is software
product like Microsoft Windows. Such software is never sold to end consumer, but licensed.
Read excerpt from Microsoft Windows EULA [10].
Microsoft Windows 7 Professional End User License Agreement (EULA) Excerpt
SCOPE OF LICENSE. The software is licensed, not sold. This agreement only gives you some rights to use the
features included in the software edition you licensed. Microsoft reserves all other rights. Unless applicable
law gives you more rights despite this limitation, you may use the software only as expressly permitted in this
agreement. In doing so, you must comply with any technical limitations in the software that only allow you to
use it in certain ways. You may not -
Work around any technical limitations in the software;
15. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 10
Reverse engineer, decompile or disassemble the software, except and only to the extent that applicable
law expressly permits, despite this limitation;
Use components of the software to run applications not running on the software;
Make more copies of the software than specified in this agreement or allowed by applicable law, despite
this limitation;
Publish the software for others to copy;
Rent, lease or lend the software; or
Use the software for commercial software hosting services.
Second type of software is commonly known as FLOSS which stands for
[9]
Free/Liberal/Open Source Software . Generally such software is governed by GNU
General Public License, which is structured exactly reverse as that of Microsoft’s EULA. The
software source code is open and users can modify, redistribute, copy or use it for personal or
commercial use. Modified GNUs allow users to sell additional features built on top of
FLOSS based software frameworks for commercial purposes. There are many companies like
IBM which are building large scale commercial software on platforms like Java or Linux
which are Open Source Software.
As we discussed in previous section on software development delivery models, the IP
exposed in two models of product development vs. service development can be as follows. In
product development, the company which is proprietary owner of product invests a lot in
R&D efforts, typically in new features, algorithms. Typically a large number of patents are
registered across countries to protect this information. Vendors working on these products in
development, testing or deployment phases, depending upon their involvement, get exposed
to this intellectual information. Vendors involved belong to software companies typically not
competing with client itself. But same company can serve client’s competitors. The same
person may be working for competing company in the future. The humans can’t be ramped
down. So, although the actual source code is protected by patents and copyrights, the
knowledge gained by person in terms of ideas and processes stays with him permanently. The
same risk exists for permanent employees of client. But, considering attrition rate higher with
contractors than product firms themselves, the risk of leakage of such information is high
when it comes to involvement of vendors (outsourced contractors).
16. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 11
IP in Services
In custom application or services developed, although there is less involvement of
research protected by patents, the code developed is intellectual property of vendors. But in
such contracts, it’s not the code that is critical IP. It is knowledge of business processes of
clients that vendors gain in order to develop software for them. A company typically
maintains a lot of information on business processes, suppliers, channels, margins, distributor
contracts and pricing secret as it gains competitive advantage out of it. As part of software
development, vendor gains deep insight into these processes. This is the real IP exposed to
outsiders. In fact, such knowledge is hard to quantify and hence difficult to protect even with
copyright or patent laws. Similar risks exist due to attrition of vendor resources to competing
organization.
But, in software industry new business models are evolving, where vendor providing
service to traditional customers can retain the IP rights i.e. Contractors will not make
software on demand for the client which is owned by client but managed by vendor. Now,
evolving models of cloud computing and Software as a Service (SaaS) [11] are resulting in the
vendors renting these services to their clients rather than selling their software. Google rents
various enterprise services like Gmail, Google Docs where enterprises have to pay per usage
to the Google. But they don’t have to worry about hosting and storing these services large
data centers. In this model, various APIs are designed by the vendor, which need to be
consumed by client side software in order to consume the services. While, APIs are largely in
public domain thereby reducing IP risks of vendors, integrating vendors still are exposed to
client’s business processes and internal data.
Trainings
Employees are provided various trainings which are related or unrelated to work they
do. This is futuristic investment that employers do in their employees. It includes a variety of
17. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 12
internal and external trainings, certifications and mentorship programs. The knowledge
gained by individual is part of organization’s intellectual capital. In order to gain contracts in
outsourcing world, employers require their workforce trained in appropriate areas. Even
sometimes client firms provide trainings to contractors in order to ramp them up on the
project work they are doing. The knowledge always stays with person and benefits his
throughout the career, but it comes at cost of one of the companies he worked with.
Management of IP
What do we mean by management of IP? Global organizations are in continuous
exposure of IP due to larger partner involvement in their value chain. IP Management is
defined as Identification, Protection and Exploitation of the intellectual assets of the
organization.
In software development, the code is open to those who work on it. And this code
forms major component of IP assets of the company. So, from corporate strategy point of
view, it is important that company identifies its short term and long term goals. Then it
should identify what is the key intellectual asset it has/need in order to achieve them. Then
the strategies to protect those assets are needed to be devised. In order to balance company’s
other goals, there will be need to exploit and expose these assets to various partners involved
in delivery chain. So, based on nature of engagement, the company should review
periodically its strategy with respect to protection and enhancement of those IP assets.
Accordingly, such changes should be made.
Important point to note here is that software is generally protected through
assemblies, which are binary versions of the working code. This means that code is not
visible to users. This is typical method used by proprietary software. But, there are ways to
reverse engineer those assemblies and generate equivalent code segments that perform the
binary tasks. If we apply principles of VRIO (Valuable, Rare, Not Imitable, Exploitable by
18. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 13
organization), then we can hardly classify code as Not Imitable. There are many alternative
ways to make it look different than original but performing same function. This is the easiest
way adopted to work around patents and copyrights. That’s why over period of time, the IP
assets of software firm deteriorate.
Figure 4 IP Management Workflow: Software Development
*Source: Based on figure from Govt. of Australia’s guide for IP [25], Modified for Software Development
19. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 14
Legal Framework
In this section, we will take overview of Intellectual Property laws in some leading
countries in software world. We will also look at contract laws between partner companies
and employer-employee contracts.
IP Laws in the world
Due to large concentration of software companies, United States has been leading in
creating legal framework for protection of intellectual property. The laws exist at both federal
and individual state level. They deal with trademarks, copyright, patents, trade secrets and
other aspects of intellectual property [12]. A patent is traditional way of protecting inventions
[14]
. But a patent restricts use by inventor to gain economic benefit. But it does not keep
information secret. By registering patent, the entire technical information is revealed. In
world of software, it is relatively easy for organizations to make certain replacements in
approach and bypass patents in order to copy features in competing products. Typical
example is Apple has hundreds of patens on capacitive touch screen. But, patents limit the
idea to design of screen. All competitors have come up with capacitive touch screens in their
[13]
devices by twisting certain design methods. But Trade secret is defined as the proprietary
information that generates economic advantage for particular business. The organization does
not disclose it anywhere and continues to receive benefits till it remains secret. Economic
Espionage Act of 1996, by Federal government passed under National Information
Infrastructure Protection Act of 1996 provides protection for trade secrets of organization
which covers prohibition of usage of trade secret and its usage or inclusion in any product for
economic benefit of any entity other than owner. This specially covers for use of trade secrets
of US based companies for benefit of foreign entities. Economic Espionage Act as equated
trade secret threat with threat to the national security of United States. From global
outsourcing scenario, this is important legal framework.
20. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 15
European Union, largest economic entity in the world, controls patents in the territory
governed through European Patent Office. It was established through conventions and treaties
at European or International levels like Strasbourg Convention 1963, European Patent
Convention 1973, London Agreement 2008, Patent Law Treaty and WTO agreements. EU
member states may or may not govern patents in their respective treaties. But, EU patent
override patents issued by member states. European Union is however criticized for weaker
[15]
laws on trade secret protection as compared to United States. As described by DeMarco ,
let’s look at case of Samarth Agrawal who worked for French bank Société Générale in New
York. He copied and printed source code of algorithm used by bank with intention to sell it to
competing hedge fund. On basis of evidence from video surveillance and print logs, FBI
agents arrested him the day it was detected. Accused was convicted and sentenced to penalty
applicable under law. However, in European Union, criminal law is not applied immediately
in such cases. Also the investigating agencies lack resources and experience to investigate
such cases of electronic trade secret theft. This means that Samarth if had done this crime
sitting in Paris HQ of Société Générale, might have walked free after being detected for such
a crime.
Situation in developing world is far worse. India, which is largest country hosting IT
services outsourcing projects outside United States, there are no laws defining term trade
[16]
secret . India is signatory on WTO’s agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual
Property (TRIP) and has enacted certain IP laws through new acts or amendments to existing
laws. These include laws related to patents and copyrights. However, Indian legal framework
does not define the term “trade secret”. There are no text or reference cases available with the
courts. However, the Indian Contract Law Section 27 provides a sort of remedy to
organizations. We will see in detail in next section on contract laws.
21. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 16
Typically, from software development point of view, the IP laws related to patent,
copyright and trade secrets are the most important ones. We need to take a note of copyright
law and how the copyright law and contract law work together. The copyright is typically
[19]
owned by the author himself. In India, the Copyright Act, 1957 (amended as per
international treaties like TRIPS, 1995) defines ownership of copyright as to the person who
is the author/creator/causer of it. Causer is the term used specifically for computer generated
work including literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work. Note that person who operates the
computer is not the copyright owner. E.g. If author of book is getting his work computerized,
the person typing the book, thereby creating computerized copy is not entitled to copyright. It
stays with the author, who caused the computerized work to be created. A computer
programming is defined by this law under literary work and hence, the programmer (the one
who conceptualizes and writes or develops code which composes into working software
program) is entitled to the copyright. This however is overridden by employment contract.
The Copyright Law specifies (Clause 17.a) that when a person develops literary work
(programming included) as part of employment contract, the employer is first owner of
copyright of such work, if it relates to function of the employer as defined unless contrary is
defined in employment contract. This means that company (employer) is default owner of
copyright and employment contracts can override it if necessary. This leaves out case of
outsourcing. The outsourcing relationship is not an employee-employer relationship and
hence is not covered by clauses above. We will look at interesting case regarding outsourcing
later in this section.
Contract Laws
United States Contract Law varies depending on respective states. However, in
general, there are provisions made which allow two parties to sign confidentiality or non-
disclosure agreements. These agreements are typically used to protect information disclosed
22. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 17
as part of proposed negotiation or business deal, which may or may not work out. The
contract is expected to call out items marked as confidential, duration for which information
is to be undisclosed. Contract Law prevents certain information that cannot be included in
such contract. This includes information received by receiver (created or obtained from third
party rightfully) before seller disclosed it, information commonly known in industry or in
public domain and potential anti-national or information including activities deemed illegal.
If such information includes trade secret then it is also governed by specific laws like
Economic Espionage Law.
[18]
European Union Contract Law generally requires an explicit declaration of
confidentiality in the contract. In addition, it says that certain information remains
confidential even if explicit declaration is not made. Further, EU Contract law adds that
certain information like trade secrets or know-how if disclosed during negotiation phase of
contract, the other party can neither disclose nor use the information for its own use, should
the contract is not formed as result of negotiation.
Employment Contracts
Typically, employers sign contracts with their employees upon joining. As we have
seen, the provisions in contract laws across countries allow enforcing confidentiality clauses
regards to information that employees get access to as part of their job. Such contracts are
used in order to prevent employees from competing with employer or work for competitor of
employer. This may also involve clauses like non-compete clause, where employees are
forbidden from competing or working for competitor for certain period even after their
employment ends with first employer.
In India, the section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 states that agreements in the
restraint of trade are void [17]. Indian Act prohibits employers to restrict use of skills, aptitude
and general technical knowledge by employees in competition with employer during period
23. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 18
of employment. So, wider than necessary restrictions may invalidate the employment contract
itself. This means that the employer if finds that employee is likely to misuse the information
he has received as part of employment agreement, then employer is entitled to injunction to
prevent such use. It is very limited remedy to employers to protect their trade secrets
compared to Economic Espionage Act of the United States. Moreover, if the act is committed
in past then employer is only eligible for damages and no criminal action can be initiated
against employee. The act also does not provide explicit protection to employers in case of
revelation of such information by employees after their period of employment.
Following are key aspects of employment contracts regards to intellectual property.
[21]
1. Pre-employment Intellectual Property of Employee:
Employer does not get entitlement to any IP earned by employee prior to joining even in
business areas related. The employment contract must call out the list in case employer
seeks use of such IP through employment and should disclose how assignment of rights
happen and who gets rights in case employee leaves the company in future. However, in
absence of any specific clause, if any employee incorporates his own intellectual property
into product owned by employer, then the employer receives non-exclusive, perpetual,
royalty-free, worldwide, make-modify-copy-sell access to said IP.
2. IP generated during employment:
Intellectual Property generated by employee can include patents, copyrights and other
information not covered by either. Patents and copyrights are governed by their respective
laws. However, by default, laws in some countries like India grant copyright to employee
(author). In such scenarios, the employment contract must include that the employee
agrees to transfer rights to all such IP to the employer. Items not covered by Patent and
24. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 19
Copyright laws are solely governed by non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements
under Contract Law.
3. Recording of IP generated by employee:
There are no laws which specify recording of IP. Hence, the employment contract should
include that employee is required to comply with company requirement of up-to-date
recording of IP in forms like designs, KM systems, notes & documentation. The company
remains sole owner of such recordings after employee quits the job.
Case Study: Pine Labs vs. Gemalto Terminals, High Court of Delhi [20]
Pine Labs Pvt. Ltd. (hereafter referred as Pine Labs) is a software development
company. Gemalto Terminals Pvt. Ltd. (former Schlumberger company, hereafter referred as
Gemalto) provides computer hardware terminals for retail establishments. Gemalto does not
have any expertise in software development. So, it engaged Pine Labs multiple times to write
software applications and backend systems for multiple of clients. Gemalto received contract
from IOCL (Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.) card fleet program in 2004. It hired services of Pine
Labs to develop software for same. Later on in 2009 Gemalto received another contract for
cards from HPCL (Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd.). Gemalto approached Pine Labs
for this sub-contract, however negotiations did not work out. As a result, Gemalto awarded
the contract to other sub-contractor named M/S QCI Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (hereafter
referred as QCI). As part of system design, the software for HPCL would require to interact
with existing IOCL system. Gemalto asked Pine Labs to hand over the source code to QCI in
order to facilitate that.
Pine Labs and Gemalto had signed Master Agreement for Development and Services
(MSA). As part of agreement and subsequent correspondence it was agreed upon by both
companies that Pine Labs has been compensated fairly by Gemalto and thereby does not
claim any right over the software code developed for use of Gemalto. Therefore, Gemalto’s
25. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 20
understanding was that it owns the source code rights of all the software developed by Pine
Labs under contracts with Gemalto. However, the agreement did not mention the time period
and territorial limits of the copyright claim. As per section 19 of Indian Copyright Act,
default period was 5 years and default territorial limits as India. Section 17 of the Copyright
Act states that the copyrights of the given program code are vested with the employee as
default unless contrary statement is agreed upon in the contract of employment. Since Indian
Copyright Act does not specifically provide guidelines in case of outsourcing contracts, the
same employment contract provisions can be used. Section 18 of the Copyright Act specifies
that copyright can be assigned to other owner, wholly or partially in terms of duration and/or
territorial limits. So, honorable court determined that outsourcing contract comes under
Section 18 which determines Assignment of copyright and not first ownership. Therefore,
court determined that due to no mention of duration, Gemalto was entitled to assignment of
copyright only for 5 years. Moreover, assignment of copyright code may not permit further
redistribution of the code unless specifically mentioned by the contract of assignment. Hence,
since the HPCL program request was after 5 years, the rightful owner of the source code was
determined to be Pine Labs.
This case highlights legal complexities in outsourcing of intellectual property like
software code. In case of outsourcing across countries, applicability of laws for such disputes
is another issue as the laws vary greatly across geographies. It is therefore important that the
contract calls out duration, territorial limits and redistribution rights for source code
copyrights. Also, the contract should specify the country laws which will be applicable in
case of any disputes.
26. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 21
Client-Vendor Relationship
Clients and Vendors are both independent companies operating in different PESTEL
environment. The relationship between these companies may well extend beyond particular
contract. In this section, we will look into various factors (non-contractual or legal) which
define this relationship and any impact they have on the IP exposure risk. Roy and Sivakumar
[24]
in their paper empirically test impact of factors like trust and external controls/verification
on intellectual property management in client-vendor relationship. In this section we will
study impact of various aspects of this relationship on management of IP i.e. Identification,
Sharing, Protection, Enhancement, Transfer and Surrender.
Trust
Authors add interesting dimension by distinguishing between Interactions and
Communication. Communication is said to be more formal, while former is regarded as
informal and unstructured which helps in building knowledge and trust in business
relationship. In section on distributed delivery models, we have already explained the
outsourcing model of interactions which are between employees of vendor and employees of
client. While inter-company communication is more formal in terms of MoUs and
agreements, we can easily imagine that when it drills down to individual employee level, the
interaction among them is more informal and the amount of friendliness in this interaction
increases over time as the trust increases. This is typical human psychological behavior. The
authors further classify the trust into two types – Competence Trust i.e. the trust that the
vendor is capable of delivering on its promises and Goodwill Trust i.e. the trust that vendor is
performing the tasks in ethical and professional intentions. While authors confine their
analysis as one way i.e. Client expectations from vendors, we would like to highlight that this
relationship should be viewed bidirectional. As we have already established that it’s not only
client’s IP which is at stake but vendor’s IP also matters significantly in outsourcing
27. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 22
relationships in software development industry. Moreover, with the fact that software vendors
are also large size companies, in many cases much bigger than their average client size (e.g.
IBM, Hewlett Packard, Accenture etc.), which naturally tilts bargaining power balance in
favor of vendor than the client.
Authors conclude that trust has 3 important dimensions which should be taken into
account - they are Quantity, Scope and Mode of communication. Please refer to appendix for
list of survey questions related to these dimensions.
Verification
As authors suggest, verification can be classified into two forms. First is External
Control, which is a more formal engagement. It involves reporting of elements for oversight
purpose. This reporting or audit can be related to inputs, processes and outcomes. In the case
of Software Development, the outcomes are very subjective or unstructured i.e. difficult to
measure. However, typical variances tracked are schedule and budget. Typically outsourcing
contract defines the reporting items, methodology and items. This step is useful in tracking
inventory of intellectual assets which may mean design documentation, reusable components,
interfaces, modules etc. from software design point of view. Client can get direct idea into
progress made by the vendor through these reporting.
Second form of verification is Internal Control or self-verification. In outsourcing
contract, if the client sets expectations beforehand and vendor assures to deliver on certain
SLAs, tracking responsibility of client reduces. But, this accountability to perform on
vendor’s side results in processes of control for internal point of view. Typical
documentation, status reporting, checkpoint meetings are some of the popular ways.
We need to note one important factor i.e. attrition. Since, employees of vendor are not
in any employment agreement with the client, they are subject to change their jobs at their
free will. Even in typical outsourcing engagements, vendor companies keep their workforce
28. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 23
highly mobile and rotate them through their entire portfolio. In country like India, where IT
[30]
industry is facing over 20% attrition each year, this problem is significant . As already
established, not all the intellectual property can be recorded in form of documentation. So, in
such cases of employee attrition a large portion of their knowledge is lost each year and
companies need to spend extra resources to make up for those. Attrition impacts the vendor-
client relationship significantly. There is also chance that the employees of vendor may work
for competitors of client after they leave their position with vendor organization. Since,
employees of vendor sign no agreement with client, there is practically no way the client can
seek injunction against this hiring. This results in loss of IP (typically unsecured), valuable
know-how and skillset for the client.
Other Aspects of Interaction
The language plays critical role in conveying thoughts therefore impact understanding
[26]
and transfer of Intellectual Property to large extent. As Gasparro says, even if offshore
executives learn the English language, they may not be versed in the quirky phrases and local
dialects which make English difficult to comprehend.
The geographic proximity helps in certain ways. First, it facilitates easy hassle-free
travel and enables face-to-face communication more frequently than in case of remote
offshoring. It is opinion of experts in software industry that personal communication is more
effective than digitally enabled communication (video conferencing) in case of knowledge
transfers. Second, the geographic proximity ensures temporal closeness i.e. time zones are
closer. West Coast of U.S. and India have time zonal difference of nearly 12 hours. In order
to work together, the team located across continents need to work long hours to achieve
overlap. It also provides relatively shorter bandwidth for such meetings compared to
possibility of accessing full working hours of employees. Working in shifts or overtime has
its own costs in personal life of employee as well as to business.
29. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 24
In today’s era of multinationals, the unique issue of conflict of cultures has arisen.
MNCs typically maintain consistent culture across countries of operations. Sometimes they
customize some policies to local culture in order to accommodate legal and social
requirements. It results in conflicts on two fronts. First is Inter-subsidiary cultural difference.
Second is organization-national culture difference. Hofstede proposed framework to evaluate
organizational cultures and national cultures, called as cultural dimension theory. He
proposed this theory as result of study done in IBM Corp. As result of Hofstede’s work
followed up by renowned psychologist, we can define following cultural dimensions that
impact organizational cultures.
1. Power Distance Index,
2. Individualism vs. Collectivism,
3. Uncertainty Avoidance Index,
4. Masculinity vs. Femininity,
5. Long term orientation, and
6. Indulgence vs. Restraint
These dimensions are largely responsible for different legal frameworks and differences in
interpretations of individual’s rights. E.g. People in U.S. consider software piracy as criminal
offence at par with physical thefts and are punishable by law there. But in countries like
China and India, the recognition of intangibles (software) vs. tangibles differs greatly. Similar
is the case with idea of patents, copyrights and any other protection given globally to
intangibles. Though under international treaties, the law makes piracy punishable offense, the
enforcement has largely remained non-existent as authorities are not exception to these
cultural dimensions. The culture, therefore, appears critical obstacle in stringent
implementation of Intellectual Property laws. Cultural differences also result in affecting
30. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 25
team dynamics and therefore may affect knowledge transfers. It also requires companies to
provide additional trainings to their global employees, which means additional costs.
Some researchers have coined the term “Nearshoring” which means outsourcing to
the country sharing borders or having proximity on one or more dimensions like linguistic,
[27]
geographic, cultural, political, temporal (time zone), economic or historical . However,
such nearshoring may not satisfy skill or cost benefits typically associated with software
outsourcing decisions. Hence, it may not prove strategic.
31. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 26
Corporate Strategy
There are risks involved in outsourcing. Companies pursue outsourcing only when
they conclude that benefits outweigh the risks involved. Hence, from strategic point of view
the outsourcing is crucial decision and requires companies to perform more due diligence
before pursuing this route. In this section, we will restrict the discussion to those aspects
which deal with intellectual property issues. Strategic decision holds more significant from
outsourcer’s point of view than vendors’. For vendors, it is their normal business process to
seek out new clients and new businesses. So, the risks involved are well understood by
management of vendor and they are well prepared on both managerial and legal front to
handle these challenges. Opposite is true for small and medium companies which seek
outsourcing of part of their business from cost saving point of view.
IP due diligence
There are multiple companies which run their own IT organizations and partly
outsource the IT services. From strategic point of view it is important what to outsource and
what not to. The key principle of management control is “If you can’t measure it, you can’t
[29]
manage it.” In order to effectively manage the IP assets, it is therefore important to
perform IP Audit or Due Diligence check before making IP transfers or sharing with the
outsourcee.
An IP Audit is defined as systematic review of IP assets created, owned, used or
acquired by the business. The key purpose is to identify under-utilized IP assets, identify
threats to company’s future cash flows and enable business planners to devise informed
[29]
strategies . Typically the IP audit tracks various internal IP assets, their life over which
company can rip benefits, extent of use, importance and estimated present value of monetary
benefits. Such audit will enable company to classify the Intellectual Assets involved in
various buckets on different parameters and help formulize policies on what to outsource and
32. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 27
what not to. Generally IP audits are performed by internal experts or independent consultants.
These are non-statutory audits and require no disclosure.
IP due diligence can be performed during various business transactions like mergers
and acquisitions, negotiating license or franchise agreement, sell of trademark or copyright,
or outsourcing. From outsourcer’s point of view, following due diligence items are important
[28]
.
1. Discuss fully with your IP professional what it is that you think you are getting out of
the transaction.
2. Enlist the protections along with their scope – operations, geographies and time
3. Understand your obligations to the outsourcee.
4. Understand in which geographies and timeline the outsourcee will transfer, use or
modify the IP assets.
From outsourcee’s point of view following due diligence checklist is important.
1. Obtain full detailed information on exposed IPs from outsourcer along with possible
protections.
2. List the operations that may be possibly performed on those IPs – transfer, share,
modify, use. Discuss the possible impact of those changes on protections already in
place. Clarify the licensing rights you receive.
3. Ensure that for all the shared IPs, the outsourcer has full ownership rights to distribute
those across geographies of operations or the areas in which such IP will be subjected
to use or change, as applicable.
4. Identify if any of those IPs are subject to litigation or infringement suits.
Business Intelligence
The possible misuse of IP transfers requires motive. Risks involved in IP transfer vary
largely based on ability of the receiver to exploit it. It is therefore critical that company has
33. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 28
sufficient intelligence on the contracting partner it is going to tie up with. This is applicable
for both outsourcee as well as outsourcer.
1. Outsourcer’s competitors
First, it is important to gather information on business relationships between the
partner company you are seeking and your business competitors. If exists, then the company
must make certain disclosures on nature of business transactions and measures taken to
protect the IP of customers so that party can decide if it can proceed with relationship. Many
large IT organizations like IBM, HP serve large number of clients, many of them fierce
competitors of each other. It is also possible that same facility of outsourcee at single location
is serving multiple competitors. However, these companies are known to implement stringent
measures to protect mutual exclusiveness of such business practices through protected bays,
physical security, access control and providing awareness trainings to employees to prevent
them disclosing details to other employees working on different client projects.
2. Outsourcee’s other businesses
It is also important to understand information about other businesses of company
along with businesses of subsidiaries and parents to determine if there are conflicts of interest
exist with business model of prospective partners. Many times outsourcee organizations are
part of large conglomerate. In that case, outsourcer will need to evaluate if outsourcee is not
benefited due to potential exposure of any of IP assets. Indian IT giant Wipro Ltd. is large
conglomerate with businesses apart from IT outsourcing in PC Original Equipment
Manufacturer, cosmetics and electrical equipment. A client like Lenovo which is large PC
OEM, may not possibly prefer to outsource services relating to its core business as there is
possible case of conflict of interest as it competes with other business (PC) of Wipro
conglomerate.
3. Outsourcee and outsourcer’s customers
34. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 29
As companies outsource IT services to outsourcee vendors, it’s not just their IP that is
exposed. But many times it involves confidential data of their customers. Hence, based on
kind of customer data that may be possibly exposed the conflict of interest needs to be
evaluated. Microsoft Corp. is not in business of PC manufacturing. But it is vendor to all PC
businesses in the world which involves selling Windows operating system. Since, Microsoft
is a large company, not all the divisions are involved in Windows sales. HCL Infosystems is
another Indian IT major which is also top PC OEM in India. Microsoft’s those divisions
which deal with PC business cannot possibly outsource to HCL as that would expose data of
other customers like Dell or HP which are competitors of HCL. Also, in OEM business
Microsoft and HCL have customer-buyer relationship. In same business, establishing parallel
partner relationship clearly creates possible opportunity for exploitation of each other’s IP.
However, unrelated divisions of Microsoft like Database Product Development can establish
outsourcing relationship with HCL without any conflict of interest.
4. Corporate Governance
To ensure proper protection and respect of partner’s IP, it is important that
prospective partners rate high on modern corporate governance. It involves maturity of
internal security processes, financial and other statutory disclosures and fair business
practices.
5. Feedback from clients
When establishing relationship with outsourcee first time, it is recommended to seek
feedback from other clients. For marketing purpose, outsourcee will be making a lot of claims
in its bids or proposals. Hence, checking the reputation of firm on fulfilling the promises may
be helpful in analyzing the vendor.
6. Financial Strength
35. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 30
Generally outsourcing relationships are established between partners which have
similar relative size in their respective industries. It is unlikely that large organizations like
GE would create outsourcing relationship with a startup unless it is seeking particular skillset.
This is primarily due to confidence in conducting large projects, financial stability required to
deliver on long term contracts. Moreover, large companies also provide large and long-term
contracts and do not like to see disruptions in outsourcee operations due to consolidation
activities like mergers and acquisitions, which are more prevalent in small and medium size
companies.
IP due diligence and corporate intelligence on prospective partners help companies to
take decision on which products they can outsource and to whom. It is critical decision in
strategic outsourcing.
36. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 31
Research Methodology
We have now reached the final stage of this research work. So far we have reviewed
several articles and papers in order to establish various factors that impact the intellectual
property transfer in global outsourcing scenario. Now in this section, we will design
framework that captures the inputs from secondary literature survey along with exploratory
analysis based on expert survey conducted on initial list of variables in order to summarize
them with resulting factors. In this section, we will discuss each step in detail.
The step-by-step research methodology is as follows:
1. Establish research problem definition.
2. Identify variables impacting intellectual property transfer in global software outsourcing
through secondary research i.e. literature survey
3. Conduct primary research i.e. expert survey in order to gather opinion on extracted list of
variables.
4. Use statistical summarization technique like perform Exploratory Factor Analysis in order
to reduce these variables and extract critical factors that explain the variance.
5. Prepare model indicating critical factors impacting intellectual property transfer in global
software outsourcing.
Problem Definition
We are aware of the phenomenon that global software outsourcing will have
implications on the intellectual property transfers between involving partners. From the
survey of literature we can enlist various observable variables that can imply these issues.
However, we are not aware of underlying factors with which these variables are interrelated.
Based on mathematical model in Wikipedia, let’s build model applicable in this
[31]
scenario . We assume that any indicator (variable) may be associated with any number of
factors. We have no theory or hypothesis in place with respect to these factors and their
37. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 32
relation. Let’s assume that there are n such variables - x1, x2, x3…..xn. Let there be m
underlying factors f1, f2, f3,….fm. We will be conducting survey of N number of person to
obtain scores for n variables. Therefore xi,j represents score of jth person against variable xi.
Let µ1, µ2,… µn be means of all observed values of variables x1, x2,….xn. Let li,k represent
factor loadings for ith variable for kth factor. Hence l1,2 will represent factor loading of xi on f2.
We can define mathematical model for ith response of variable x1 as:
x1,i = µ1 + l1,1*f1 + l1,2*f2 + . . . + l1,m*fm + ε1,i
Therefore, a generic matrix based model can be defined as:
X = µI + LF + ε
Where, I is identity matrix of order 1 x N.
X is matrix of observable random variables of order n x N
µ is column matrix of means of all n variables of order n x 1
L is factor loading matrix of order n x m
F is underlying factor matrix of order m x N
ε is variance unexplained by factors or error in observation
We have now established the fundamental mathematical model of factor analysis. We
therefore, can summarize the problem definition as follows –
“Identify underlying factors that impact intellectual property transfer in global
software outsourcing scenario based on observable variables based on the feedback of the
experts in the related field.”
In this research we will perform factor analysis independently for three aspects –
Legal, Human Resource and Strategic, which are mutually exclusive of each other. The data
reduction will be applied for variables under these categories separately.
38. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 33
Variables Extracted
Based on the secondary research (literature review) done in this report, following 39
variables have been identified. These variables are classified into three aspects – Legal,
Human Resource and Strategic, in line with the organization of the report.
Section Variable ID Variable Description
VAR00001 IP asset identification in contract
VAR00002 IP asset valuation in contract
VAR00003 Single language contract
VAR00004 Dispute jurisdiction
VAR00005 Applicable law in dispute
Legal
VAR00006 Licensing terms - rights, geographies and time
VAR00007 knowledge of Patent, Copyright, Non-disclosure/Confidentiality Laws
VAR00008 knowledge of Non-disclosure/IP annexure signed in employment contract
VAR00009 knowledge of IP laws in home country
VAR00010 knowledge of IP laws in Country of origin of partner
VAR00011 Establishing communication protocol with partner and train employees
VAR00012 Employee Training on what all constitutes as IP assets
VAR00013 Employee Training on Strategic importance of those IP assets
VAR00014 National cultural dimensions: similarities and differences between client/vendor
VAR00015 More number of messages exchanged
VAR00016 More time spent in communication
Human
VAR00017 Communication between employees at multiple levels
Resources
VAR00018 Communication between employees from different functions
VAR00019 Proactive sharing of information required to perform task
VAR00020 Face-to-face communication
VAR00021 Informal/personal communication Incl. Facebook, Google Chat, LinkedIn
VAR00022 Trust on capability of other partner on delivering on promises
VAR00023 Trust on ethical and professional behavior of other partner
VAR00024 Recording IP in desired format (documentation, diagrams, KM systems)
VAR00025 Market reputation of partner company
VAR00026 Internal Project Progress Reporting, Review and Tracking (Within firm)
VAR00027 Periodical Project Progress Reporting, Review and Tracking with/to/for the client
VAR00028 Perform regular IP Audit (assets, life, benefits, importance)
VAR00029 Engage IP experts (internal or external consultants)
Strategic VAR00030 Classify IP assets based on value and importance
VAR00031 Evaluate potential assets exposed using IP due diligence checklist
VAR00032 Organizational policy on what to outsource
VAR00033 Business relationship of partner with your competitors
VAR00034 Other businesses of your partner (Possible Conflict of Interest)
VAR00035 Relationship between partner and your customers
VAR00036 Corporate Governance policies of partner
39. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 34
VAR00037 Market reputation/Feedback from others about your partner
VAR00038 Financial strength of partner
VAR00039 Political, Economical and Social conditions in partner's country(s) of operation
Survey Design
In order to reduce these variables using Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) method, a
primary research survey was conducted.
Survey Nature:
An anonymous survey was created. No personally identifiable content was captured.
Apart from responses to specific questionnaire described below, some additional profile
information was captured. It included user’s role whether outsourcer (client/customer) or
outsourcee (vendor or contractor). Position title and work experience in years was also asked.
Also the geographical location of user was captured. This data has no direct role in
identifying factor weightages, but it may be used for qualitative analysis of the data. It also
indicates diversity of responses gathered.
Questionnaire:
A survey questionnaire was designed with one question corresponding to each of the
39 variables. The questions were not organized as per sections of analysis to eliminate any
inherent bias. Rather questions were combined based on topics like contract, training,
communication etc. Audience was asked to rate importance of the variable as output. All
questions were positive in nature i.e. higher importance of presence of variable will always be
indicated by 7 for from intellectual property impact, while 1 would indicate no or lesser
importance of particular variable.
Specific Questions:
Only 1 specific question was asked – “According to you, which of the following is the
correct representation of IP exposure risk in software outsourcing?” The intention is to
40. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 35
measure perception of IP issues faced by vendors or clients among audience. We will discuss
qualitatively these responses in later section.
Scale:
All responses were gathered on Likert’s 7 point scale from “Not Important” to “Very
Important”. All questions had same response scale, so no standardization of responses was
required. Among Likert’s scales, 5-point and 7-point are considered most accurate and
reliable as they represent adequate intervals from both user distinguishability point of view as
well as statistical significance. However, though there is no conclusive evidence, many
psychometricians recommend 7-point scale over 5-point in obtaining observation scores for
exploratory factor analysis. Hence, the 7-point Likert scale is used in this survey.
Survey Responses
In this section we will discuss sampling method employed in conducting survey and
descriptive analysis of audience profile.
Sampling Method:
It was decided to conduct the survey as Expert survey. The method used was
Snowball sampling which is non-probability sampling method. Invitations were sent out to
known practitioners in software outsourcing or offshoring model. The audience involved
professionals on both client as well as vendor side. Individuals were also asked to forward
invitations to people they know who have experience in managing outsourced projects from
either side. We have received considerable number of responses from such secondary level of
contacts.
The survey was setup using user-friendly UI of the surveymonkey.com and was
administered online. The target audience was contacted using personal email invitations with
standard 1 reminder 2 days prior to deadline using messaging on their social networking
(Facebook) profile.
41. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 36
A total of 35 participants undertook the survey. Out of those responses a total of 28
responses were considered valid after eliminating inconsistent and incomplete responses. In
following section we will discuss brief profile of the audience.
Participant Profile:
Overall audience represents diverse set of individuals from both sides of outsourcing,
in various positions and with wider work experience range. Although majority audience
comes from India, there was decent representation from matured markets like North America,
Hong Kong and Western Europe. The audience profile is discussed with help of graphical
diagrams.
10
Outsourcee (Vendor /
Contractor)
18
Outsourcer (Client /
Customer)
Figure 5 Participant Statistics by Role
3 7
People Managers
8
Developers
Consultants/Analysts
10
Test/Support
Figure 6 Participant Statistics by Position
42. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 37
4 5
Upto 2 years
6
Upto 5 years
Upto 8 years
13
8+ years
Figure 7 Participant Statistics by Related Work Experience
2 1
6 India
North America
19 Hong Kong/Singapore
Western Europe
Figure 8 Participant Statistics by Work Location
Client has more risks
2
4
13
Client and vendor have
equal risks
9 Only client IP is exposed
Vendor has more risks
Figure 9 Participants’ perception of IP risks
Above diagram represents the participants’ perception on IP risks involved in
software outsourcing. Since the survey was within expert audience, everyone agrees that
there are considerable IP risks involved in software outsourcing. However, most believe that
client is more susceptible. But convincing number of individuals consent to our opinion that
43. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 38
both client and vendor face equal risks with respect to IP in software outsourcing. The minor
variations may be accorded to different scenarios like type of outsourcing, types of
companies involved and different level of involvement of participant with respect to given
software project. The opinion on risks is not subject to further analysis as part of this study.
Factor Analysis Configuration
Software used for analysis was IBM SPSS version 16.0 licensed to Indian Institute of
Management Lucknow which is made available to students for academic purposes. The tool
supports out-of-box functionality for statistical analysis using Factor reduction method. This
helps summarizing large factors into more compact components. The tool also supports
Varimax rotation.
Statistical Analysis Package IBM SPSS v16.0
Descriptives 1. Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure
2. Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity
Extraction Method Principle Component Extraction
Factor Extraction Criteria Eigen Value > 1.0
Rotation Method Varimax rotation with Kaiser Normalization
Interpretation Method Identify loading >= 0.5 in rotated component
matrix
Following are various details regards to Exploratory Factor Analysis method
conducted.
Descriptives:
We will use following descriptives to check validity of factor reduction analysis.
44. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 39
(1) Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure (KMO) of sampling adequacy: This measures
partial correlations between variables. If > 0.5, it indicates that the given sample is sufficient
for factor reduction. Otherwise, it may indicate that the factor analysis is satisfactory.
(2) Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity: The null hypothesis that factors are uncorrelated
must be rejected in order to proceed with the factor analysis. If significance is less than 0.05,
it indicates there is sufficient evidence to reject null hypothesis and the factors have strong
correlation among themselves, hence factor analysis can be conducted.
Extraction Method:
The motive is to extract minimum number of factors that explain variation. Hence, we
will use Principle Component Method for extraction.
No. of factors to be extracted:
There is no requirement to extract fixed number of factors. We will extract all those
factors which have Eigen Value higher than 1.0.
Rotation Method:
Since we want to reduce number of variables with high loading on a factor, we use
orthogonal rotation. The particular method used here is Varimax rotation with Kaiser
Normalization.
Interpretation Method:
We will interpret loading of variables on factor using rotated component matrix. We
will follow general thumb rule of identifying loadings which are >=0.5. In some cases, where
variable did not load on any factor, we have taken factor loadings which are close to 0.5, due
to inadequacy of sample size.
Factor Analysis Results
The 3 sections – Legal, Human Resource Practices and Organizational Strategy are
not factors but aspects of organizational operations. Hence, factor analysis was performed
45. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 40
separately for each section. There is sufficient literature available to say that these three
aspects are independent. This would avoid any random pattern to emerge among variables
from different sections. Let’s look at EFA results one-by-one.
Legal Aspects:
SSPS Output
Descriptive Value Remark
KMO sampling adequacy 0.607 Sample sufficient for factor analysis
Barlett’s Test of sphericity sig. 0.000 Null Hypothesis rejected, Factor Analysis possible
a
Rotated Component Matrix
Component
Variables 1 2 3
IP asset identification in contract .099 -.095 .894
IP asset valuation in contract .261 .042 .879
Single language contract .577 .279 .292
Dispute jurisdiction .956 .089 .078
Applicable law in dispute .950 .033 .085
Licensing terms - rights, geographies and time .759 -.047 .313
knowledge of Patent, Copyright, Non-disclosure/Confidentiality Laws -.172 .915 .195
knowledge of Non-disclosure/IP annexure signed in employment contract .118 .945 -.029
knowledge of IP laws in home country .390 .804 -.305
knowledge of IP laws in Country of origin of partner .668 .614 -.149
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
Rotation converged in 6 iterations.
Interpretation
The factors are interpreted as follows-
Factor Variance Loadi
# Interpretation Explained ng Variables in Factor
F1 Legal intricacies of 34.45% 0.577 Single language contract
contractual contents 0.956 Dispute jurisdiction
0.95 Applicable law in dispute
0.759 Licensing terms - rights, geographies and time
0.668 Knowledge of IP laws in Country of origin of partner
F2 Employee training 28.53% 0.915 knowledge of Patent, Copyright, Non-
46. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 41
on legal matters disclosure/Confidentiality Laws
related to IP knowledge of Non-disclosure/IP annexure signed in
0.945 employment contract
0.804 knowledge of IP laws in home country
0.614 knowledge of IP laws in Country of origin of partner
F3 Formal IP 19.23% 0.894 IP asset identification in contract
assessment 0.879 IP asset valuation in contract
Human Resource Aspects:
SSPS Output
Descriptive Value Remark
KMO sampling adequacy 0.545 Sample sufficient for factor analysis
Barlett’s Test of sphericity sig. 0.000 Null Hypothesis rejected, Factor Analysis possible
a
Rotated Component Matrix
Component
Variables
1 2 3 4 5
Establishing communication protocol with partner and train employees .624 -.062 .359 .039 -.438
Employee Training on what all constitutes as IP assets .880 .213 -.186 .005 .059
Employee Training on Strategic importance of those IP assets .879 .228 -.172 .082 -.001
National cultural dimensions: similarities and differences between .839 -.030 .268 .069 .009
client/vendor
More number of messages exchanged -.043 .290 .893 -.002 .173
More time spent in communication .052 .312 .781 .041 .180
Communication between employees at multiple levels .055 .702 .416 .327 .124
Communication between employees from different functions .201 .803 .236 -.152 -.205
Proactive sharing of information required to perform task .094 .809 .159 .137 .262
Face-to-face communication .337 .391 .157 -.258 .588
Informal/personal communication Incl. Facebook, Google Chat, LinkedIn -.141 -.021 .299 .092 .879
Trust on capability of other partner on delivering on promises .026 .074 .188 .911 -.081
Trust on ethical and professional behavior of other partner .107 .042 -.129 .933 .063
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
Rotation converged in 6 iterations.
Interpretation
The factors are interpreted as follows-
47. Intellectual Property Issues in Global Software Outsourcing 42
Factor Variance Loadi
# Interpretation Explained ng Variables in Factor
F4 Employee training 21.88% Establishing communication protocol with partner
on soft skills and 0.624 and train employees
awareness of IP 0.88 Employee Training on what all constitutes as IP assets
Employee Training on Strategic importance of those
0.879 IP assets
National cultural dimensions: similarities and
0.839 differences between client/vendor
F5 Holistic and 17.20% Communication between employees at multiple
proactive 0.702 levels
communication Communication between employees from different
0.803 functions
Proactive sharing of information required to perform
0.809 task
F6 Frequent contact 16.09% 0.893 More number of messages exchanged
0.781 More time spent in communication
F7 Trusted relationship 14.91% Trust on capability of other partner on delivering on
between partners 0.588 promises
Trust on ethical and professional behavior of other
0.879 partner
F8 Encourage informal 11.65% 0.911 Face-to-face communication
contact Informal/personal communication Incl. Facebook,
0.933 Google Chat, LinkedIn
Corporate Strategic Aspects:
SSPS Output
Descriptive Value Remark
KMO sampling adequacy 0.587 Sample sufficient for factor analysis
Barlett’s Test of sphericity sig. 0.000 Null Hypothesis rejected, Factor Analysis possible
a
Rotated Component Matrix
Component
Variables
1 2 3 4 5
Recording IP in desired format (documentation, diagrams, KM systems) .164 .269 .001 -.145 .780
Market reputation of partner company .701 .333 .356 -.292 .068
Internal Project Progress Reporting, Review and Tracking (Within firm) .255 .252 .111 .863 .058
Periodical Project Progress Reporting, Review and Tracking with/to/for the .330 .209 .203 .797 .140
client
Perform regular IP Audit (assets, life, benefits, importance) .163 .179 .763 .146 .248