The Executive’s Guide to Opening a Global Capability Center

A Global Capability Center succeeds or fails based on decisions made before the first employee starts.

We’ve watched hundreds of companies build these centers. The ones that succeed make deliberate choices about structure, leadership, and culture from day one. The ones that struggle treat their GCC like a branch office with cheaper salaries. That fundamental misunderstanding costs millions in lost productivity, failed initiatives, and eventual restructuring. 

Foundation Decisions

Legal structure determines everything from tax treatment to talent retention. Most companies choose wholly-owned subsidiaries for maximum control over operations and intellectual property. India allows 100% foreign direct investment in most sectors, removing ownership barriers that complicate operations in other countries. At Stanton Chase, we advise clients that choosing between a subsidiary and branch office affects their ability to offer stock options, a deciding factor for senior talent. 

Location shapes everything that follows. Seventy percent of companies report higher attrition rates in tier-1 cities as organizations compete for the same employees. Tier-2 cities offer 40% better retention and 35% lower costs but may lack specialized skills. We often recommend hub-and-spoke models: AI research in Bangalore where the talent concentrates, process operations in Pune where costs are lower and attrition manageable. 

Leadership Selection

The wrong leader dooms a GCC before opening. At Stanton Chase, we assess GCC leadership candidates on their ability to bridge cultures, not just manage operations. They need credibility with Silicon Valley venture capitalists and Bangalore engineers equally. The leader also needs real decision-making power. BCG’s research reveals that 92% of underperforming GCCs keep decision-making highly centralized at headquarters, while top performers grant their GCC leaders autonomy for key functions. Without that autonomy, every decision waits for headquarters approval, killing momentum. 

Beyond autonomy, the leader needs local expertise to maintain that momentum. The most successful GCC heads are often Indians who’ve worked abroad. They know which government officials to call when regulations change between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. They understand what Indian employees expect versus their American counterparts. They speak the language of both IIT professors and Wall Street executives. We’ve placed dozens of GCC heads who fit this profile: Indian education, international corporate experience, and the ability to operate in both worlds without constant headquarters guidance. 

Even the best leader will fail without the right team from the start. Most companies focus on hiring engineers and analysts but forget the specialists who keep operations running. You need HR leaders who understand Indian labor laws and American or European corporate policies. You need finance heads who can manage both local compliance and parent company reporting. At Stanton Chase, we’re increasingly helping companies build entire leadership teams before the GCC opens, not just finding the head to run it. 

Building Staying Power

GCCs require completely different management approaches, especially when considering the demographics of a country like India. In India, the median age is 28.7 years, compared to 38 in the US and China. Young employees prioritize learning opportunities and career progression over job security. We advise clients that even GCCs paying 12 to 20% premiums over IT services companies still lose talent without strong development programs. 

But training requires real investment, not just budget allocation. Over 80% of GCCs dedicate specific budgets to continuous development. They develop capabilities through structured programs rather than poaching talent from competitors, reducing both costs and attrition. 

Cultural integration needs deliberate structure too. BCG finds 50% of top performers have locally tailored employee value propositions versus only 8% of underperformers. The difference shows in everything from communication patterns to decision-making speed. At Stanton Chase, we help companies design onboarding programs that preserve local strengths while building global alignment. 

Governance and Growth

Once the foundation and team are in place, most companies make a fatal error: they manage their GCC like a vendor with an employee badge. They track activity metrics, require approval for every decision, and wonder why the center never evolves beyond processing work. 

Successful GCCs operate differently. BCG found that 60% of top performers retain P&L ownership for significant products and services. This ownership changes everything. When GCC leaders control budgets and see financial results, they think like business partners rather than service providers. They find ways to generate revenue, not just reduce costs. 

The metrics tell the same story. While 84% of underperforming GCCs only track transactional metrics like tickets closed, 50% of top performers measure purely outcome-based KPIs. They track patents filed, revenue generated, and processes transformed. The shift from measuring activity to measuring impact changes how teams think about their work. 

Growth then becomes organic rather than forced. Over 90% of top performers established Centers of Excellence recently, building expertise in AI or analytics before expanding scope. Half operate with tested business continuity plans that include succession planning and knowledge documentation. They build capability systematically rather than just adding headcount. 

The companies that succeed treat GCCs as strategic investments requiring sustained executive attention. Those that view them as offshore cost centers discover the difference in their results. At Stanton Chase, we’ve seen the pattern repeatedly: GCCs with real ownership and accountability become innovation engines. Those managed like vendors remain expensive processing centers.  

About the Authors

Sundar Rajan Ramalingam is a Partner at Stanton Chase with nearly three decades of global leadership experience spanning manufacturing and technology sectors. His career uniquely positions him to guide GCC strategy—he’s led the scaling of a multi-billion-dollar global engineering capabilities division and supported the creation and building of several Global Capability Centers firsthand. Having transitioned from strategic HR leadership to general management with P&L ownership, Sundar brings both the people and business perspectives critical to GCC success. He holds an MBA from XLRI Jamshedpur and completed executive education at Wharton’s Chief Human Resource Officer Program. Based in North America, Sundar serves clients across the US and India, specializing in building high-performing executive teams for technology, professional services, and industrial sectors. 

Chandan Radhakrishna is a Partner at Stanton Chase serving clients in Bangalore, Hyderabad, and Singapore. With 17 years of experience in the GCC and Global Business Services ecosystem, Chandan has advised global enterprises on outsourcing, shared services, and GCC strategy during his tenure at Everest Group and NASSCOM. His expertise in analyzing market trends and delivering actionable insights has helped both enterprises and GCCs navigate complex transformations and refine their business strategies. As a trusted advisor to C-suite executives, Chandan specializes in securing top leadership talent that drives growth and innovation in technology, financial services, and consumer sectors. He holds a degree in mechanical engineering from the University of Sheffield.