Wireless Technology Centre 2010 A cost/quality comparison (Based on information from the Financial...

Wireless Technology Centre 2010A cost/quality comparison

(Based on information from the Financial Times fDi Benchmark tool)

The following analysis is based on fDi Benchmark, an online location benchmarking tool provided by

the Financial Times (FT)

fDi Benchmark compared the Scottish Central Belt with the leading locations globally for a Wireless Technology Centre

based on an analysis of over 55 quality factors and 10 cost factors

A key emphasis was placed on:

Labour availability and quality

Presence of industrial cluster

General business environment

Infrastructure and accessibility

Other factors including the living environment were also assessed

Benchmarking Study

Project Profile Overview

Weighting Model Overview Weight

Labour Availability and Quality 35

Presence of an Industrial Cluster 30

General Business Environment 20

Infrastructure and Accessibility 10

Living Environment 5

Employee Type Profile Head count

Information Technology

Network Analyst 1

Network Engineer 1

Programmer 5

Project Team Leader 1

Senior Designer 1

Senior Manager 1

Senior Programmer 1

Senior System Analyst 1

Software Development Engineer 4

Software Development Manager 1

Software Programmer 10

Systems Analyst 2

Systems Designer 1

fDi Benchmark Matrix

The fDi Benchmark Matrix shows the trade off between cost and quality across the 8 selected locations for the Wireless technology centre (NEW) profile. The average cost and quality score is 100 for the selected locations.

Source: fDi Intelligence, from the Financial Times Ltd

The ‘ideal’ quadrant is the

top left

(high quality/lower operating costs)

fDi Benchmark Matrix

The matrix is based on the weighting and cost model for the Wireless technology centre (NEW) profile. The weighting model identifies the key location criteria for the project and the cost model shows the primary cost inputs for the operation. The cost and quality scores are calculated using real data on all the location requirements and cost inputs.

The results indicate the different location solutions for the investor as follows:

•Beijing offers higher quality at lower cost than the average of all the selected locations

•London, Tokyo offer higher quality but at higher cost

•Boston (MA), Dusseldorf and the Scottish Central Belt offer lower cost, but at lower quality

The Operating Cost value is in GBP – United Kingdom Pound

Location Qualitative ScoreOperating Cost

IndexOperating Cost

Value

Boston (MA) 90.5 104.5 2,339,475

Brussels 79.2 97.1 2,173,479

Dusseldorf 65.2 94.6 2,119,525

London 122.1 110.8 2,482,011

Paris 87.5 100.1 2,242,150Scottish Central Belt 89.2 62.0 1,387,426

Beijing 118.8 87.7 1,963,698

Tokyo 147.6 143.3 3,208,366


Location Attractiveness Index

The location attractiveness index shows the overall attractiveness of the 8 selected locations for the Wireless technology centre (NEW) profile. The ratio of quality to cost is 50:50


Cost Quality Competitiveness

The cost quality competitiveness uses the results of the fDi Benchmark Matrix to show the value for money of each location option. The graph shows that:•The top locations offering the highest quality for a given level of cost are the Scottish Central Belt and Beijing•London and Beijing offer an above average level of quality and good value for money as there relative quality is higher than their relative cost.


Cost Competitiveness

The annual operating cost calculation for Wireless technology centre (NEW) is based on the following primary input costs: Labour Cost

The average cost across the selected locations for Wireless technology centre (NEW) is GBP 2,239,515

The greatest cost saving between the selected locations is GBP1,820,942 per annum

The values in the chart below are in GBP - United Kingdom Pound


Cost Competitiveness

9

The locations with the lowest operating costs are the Scottish Central Belt and Boston (MA)

In terms of the individual cost factors, the locations with the lowest costs are:• Labour Cost: the Scottish Central Belt and Beijing• Property: Dusseldorf and Brussels

The values in the table below are in GBP - United Kingdom Pound

Location Labour Cost PropertyBoston (MA) 2,149,366 190,108Brussels 2,004,127 169,350Dusseldorf 1,960,645 158,879London 1,532,650 949,360Paris 1,820,880 421,270Scottish Central Belt 1,139,821 247,603Beijing 1,447,392 516,305Tokyo 2,423,646 784,720


Quality Competitiveness

The quality competitiveness assessment is based on the weight model for the Wireless technology centre (NEW) profile which assesses each location across the following location factors: General Business Environment, Labour Availability and Quality, Presence of an Industrial Cluster, Infrastructure and Accessibility and Living Environment. The average score for the selected locations is 100.

The locations with the highest quality scores are Tokyo and London


Quality Competitiveness

In terms of the individual quality factors, the locations with the highest scores are:•General Business Environment: the Scottish Central Belt and London•Labour Availability and Quality: Tokyo and Beijing•Presence of an Industrial Cluster: Tokyo and Beijing•Infrastructure and Accessibility: London and Paris•Living Environment: the Scottish Central Belt and Boston (MA)

LocationGeneral Business

EnvironmentLabour Availability

and QualityPresence of an

Industrial ClusterInfrastructure and

AccessibilityLiving

EnvironmentBoston (MA) 34 21 20 5 10Brussels 23 31 10 5 10Dusseldorf 26 16 8 5 10London 39 44 23 6 10Paris 24 34 15 6 9Scottish Central Belt 37 26 11 4 12Beijing 27 44 32 5 10Tokyo 29 64 41 5 9


General Business Environment

The quality competitiveness breakdown for General Business Environment for the Wireless technology centre (NEW) profile is shown below

The locations with the highest overall scores for General Business Environment are the Scottish Central Belt and London


General Business Environment

In terms of the individual quality criteria within General Business Environment, the locations with the highest scores are:

Economic growth and stability: Tokyo and London

Operating risk: Beijing and London

Taxation and incentives: the Scottish Central Belt and London

Regulatory environment: Paris and London

LocationEconomic growth and

stability

Operating risk

Taxation and

incentives

Regulatory environme

ntBoston (MA) 1.28 6.58 16.63 9.65Brussels 1.02 3.28 10.24 8.89Dusseldorf 1.19 3.22 13.39 8.49London 1.89 8.79 18.25 9.77Paris 1.30 3.20 9.29 10.07Scottish Central Belt 0.55 8.79 18.25 9.77Beijing 0.65 11.23 8.83 6.61Tokyo 4.13 2.92 13.11 8.73


Labour Availability and Quality

The quality competitiveness breakdown for Labour Availability and Quality for the Wireless technology centre (NEW) profile is shown below

The locations with the highest overall scores for Labour Availability and Quality are Tokyo and Beijing


Labour Availability and Quality

In terms of the individual quality criteria within Labour Availability and Quality, the locations with the highest scores are:

Overall size of labour market: Tokyo and London

Tightness and competition for labour: Brussels and London

Experienced industry-specific staff: Tokyo and Beijing

Flexibility of labour regulations: Boston (MA) and London

LocationOverall size

of labour market

Tightness and

competition for labour

Experienced industry-

specific staff

Flexibility of labour

regulations

Boston (MA) 2.91 10.92 4.21 3.11

Brussels 1.07 25.20 3.03 1.77

Dusseldorf 0.77 12.38 1.79 1.07

London 6.39 14.45 21.08 2.05

Paris 5.63 12.96 14.36 0.93

Scottish Central Belt 1.22 13.49 8.96 2.05

Beijing 6.18 1.89 34.67 1.34

Tokyo 17.82 6.70 37.89 1.68


Presence of an Industrial Cluster

The quality competitiveness breakdown for Presence of an Industrial Cluster for the Wireless technology centre (NEW) profile is shown below

The locations with the highest overall scores for Presence of an Industrial Cluster are Tokyo and Beijing


Presence of an Industrial Cluster

In terms of the individual quality criteria within Presence of an Industrial Cluster, the locations with the highest scores are:

Size of industry: Tokyo and London

Track record: Beijing and London

Research and Development Capabilities: Tokyo and Boston (MA)

Proximity to consumers: Boston (MA) and Beijing

Export competitiveness: Beijing and Tokyo

LocationSize of industry

Track record

Research and Development Capabilities

Proximity to consumers

Export competitiveness

Boston (MA) 0.94 1.22 11.51 2.53 3.82Brussels 3.72 0.84 1.30 0.26 3.61Dusseldorf 0.62 1.40 1.49 0.73 3.89London 10.46 6.25 2.05 0.66 4.01Paris 2.93 4.25 3.34 0.57 3.77Scottish Central Belt

2.37 2.20 1.69 0.66 4.01

Beijing 9.10 12.46 4.13 1.58 4.51Tokyo 9.87 3.38 22.49 1.00 4.38


Infrastructure and Accessibility

The quality competitiveness breakdown for Infrastructure and Accessibility for the Wireless technology centre (NEW) profile is shown below

The locations with the highest overall scores for Infrastructure and Accessibility are London and Paris


Infrastructure and Accessibility

In terms of the individual quality criteria within Infrastructure and Accessibility, the locations with the highest scores are:

Access to major overseas markets: London and Paris

Quality of local infrastructure: Beijing and Boston (MA)

Quality of utilities: Brussels and Dusseldorf

Quality of ICT infrastructure: London and Paris

LocationAccess to major

overseas marketsQuality of local infrastructure

Quality of utilitiesQuality of ICT infrastructure

Boston (MA) 0.86 1.70 1.13 1.10Brussels 1.36 0.84 1.40 1.05Dusseldorf 1.25 1.08 1.45 0.97London 2.34 0.94 1.13 1.49Paris 1.88 1.17 1.21 1.76Scottish Central Belt 0.65 0.94 1.13 0.93Beijing 0.79 2.03 1.23 1.32Tokyo 0.88 1.31 1.33 1.38


Living Environment

The quality competitiveness breakdown for Living Environment for the Wireless technology centre (NEW) profile is shown below

The locations with the highest overall scores for Living Environment are the Scottish Central Belt and Boston (MA)


Living Environment

In terms of the individual quality criteria within Living Environment, the locations with the highest scores are:

Cost of living: the Scottish Central Belt and Beijing

Attractiveness for international staff: London and Tokyo

LocationCost of living

Attractiveness for international staff

Boston (MA) 7.58 2.82

Brussels 7.56 2.76

Dusseldorf 7.14 2.88

London 5.52 4.53

Paris 5.90 2.95

Scottish Central Belt 9.18 2.38

Beijing 7.76 2.49

Tokyo 5.37 3.18


To realise the potential,please contact:

Scottish Development International150 Broomielaw, Atlantic Quay Glasgow G2 8LU Scotland, UK T +44 141 228 2828F +44 141 228 2089www.sdi.co.uk

Worldwide offices in: Americas, Europe, Middle East, Africa and Asia Pacific

Wireless Technology Centre 2010 A cost/quality comparison (Based on information from the Financial...

Documents

Transcript of Wireless Technology Centre 2010 A cost/quality comparison (Based on information from the Financial...