My point was that a blanket generalisation is bad because it's a blanket generalisation, the details are unimportant.
Yes, outsourcing is famously difficult to get right, and yet we've been doing it in every industry for decades now. And the famous examples become famous when something fails (boeing et. all) but there are also success stories out there. The trick, as always, is in the implementation.
My other point was that every "new thing" gets the same treatment. It doesn't work. Oh, it works but on toy problems. Well, it works on some complicated problems, but it's expensive. Ok, it works on a variety of problems, it's cheap, but it's unmaintainable. And so on, and so forth.
I am yet to be part of any outsourcing project that was actually a sucess story, where everyone came unarmed without battlefield scars, in a timeframe of the last 25 years that outsourcing started to be a common thing in enterprise consulting.
Yes, outsourcing is famously difficult to get right, and yet we've been doing it in every industry for decades now. And the famous examples become famous when something fails (boeing et. all) but there are also success stories out there. The trick, as always, is in the implementation.
My other point was that every "new thing" gets the same treatment. It doesn't work. Oh, it works but on toy problems. Well, it works on some complicated problems, but it's expensive. Ok, it works on a variety of problems, it's cheap, but it's unmaintainable. And so on, and so forth.