This session was presented at '15 Secrets to Shared Services Success" conference organised by sharedserviceslink.com. To find out more about forthcoming conferences check http://www.sharedserviceslink.com

1. Thinking about outsourcing:
Business Service Centre
Juan Fernandez Laporta
Nissan Europe, Finance Restructuring General Manager
Date 18.3.09 1

2. Topics
Introduction to Nissan
Background of Outsourcing
Project Scope
Outsourcing Evolving
Business Service Centre
Project Learning's
Questions
Date 18.3.09 2

3. Introduction to Nissan
Continuing Innovation as a Global Brand
New face of Nissan in Europe:
Vision: Nissan: Enriching People’s Lives Qashqai crossover concept car
Mission: Nissan provides unique and
innovative automotive products and services
that deliver superior measurable values to all
stakeholders in alliance with Renault.
For the automakers, products are one of the
key elements for success. Nissan strives to
develop and introduce innovative and
attractive products, which are aligned with
market trends.
Main Models:
Micra, Micra C+C, Almera, Primera, Maxima
OX, 350Z, Roadster, X-TRAIL,
Terrano, Patrol, Navara, Pathfinder, Murano,
Pickup, Kubistar, Primastar, Interstar, Cabstar,
Atleon, Note, Qashqai
Renault-Nissan Alliance: Since March 1999
Date 18.3.09 3

4. Nissan Company Fact & Figures
Headquarters Locations Date of Net Sales 10,824.2 billion yen
Establishment Operating Income 790.8 billion yen
Nissan Motor Tokyo, Dec 1933 Operating Profit Margin 7.3%
Co., Ltd. Japan
Ordinary Income 766.4 billion yen
Nissan North Tennessee, Sep 1960
Net Income 482.3 billion yen
America, Inc. U.S.A
Global Retail Sales Volume 3,769,886
Nissan Europe France Nov 2002 Global Vehicle Production 3,657,629
S.A.S Volume
Number of Employees 31,453
Nissan Switzerland Jun 2006 (non-consolidated basis)
International 180,535
SA (consolidated basis)
As of March 31, 2008
Nissan Europe:
Management of European sales and manufacturing operations in 20 European countries
Nissan International SA -Management of European sales and manufacturing operations
Nissan Europe S.A.S - Holding company for European subsidiaries and pan-European
operational support
Date 18.3.09 4

5. Topics
Introduction to Nissan
Background of Outsourcing
Project Scope
Outsourcing Evolving
Business Service Centre
Project Learning's
Questions
Date 18.3.09 5

6. Background of Outsourcing
Revival Plans
In 1999 a 3 year Nissan Revival Plan (NRP) to put Nissan back on a firm footing after several years of
decline. Affected all parts of the Nissan organisation world-wide. Achieved in just two years.
Another 3 year plan, NISSAN 180 (N180), was implemented to achieve growth.
April 2005, Carlos Ghosn has announced a third strategic plan (2005-2007) named NISSAN Value-up.
Nissan Value-Up commitments
3 key Pillars:
Sustained Profitability: to maintain top level of operating profit margin among global automakers for
each of the three years of the plan.
Growth/Volume: to achieve global sales of 4.2 million units in fiscal 2008.
ROIC: to achieve 20 % or higher return on invested capital on average over the course of the plan.
How to achieve Nissan Value-Up regarding F&A?
Standardization and Simplification of Finance Processes across with a view to Consolidate, Re-
Engineer, Migrate & Explore :
Opportunities for productivity and / or improved process capability
Enhanced Controllership across Processes
Introduction of Performance Metrics
Date 18.3.09 6

7. Topics
Introduction to Nissan
Background of Outsourcing
Project Scope
Outsourcing Evolving
Business Service Centre
Project Learning's
Questions
Date 18.3.09 7

8. Project Scope
Objective: Migrate Finance and Accounting processes in 2 phases: 59 FTE then 30 FTE , in
total 89 FTEs to 3rd party BPO (Business Process Outsourcing) provider in Budapest.
In Scope Activities: Accounts Payables, Travel & Expenses, Accounts Receivables, General
Accounting incl. month-end processes, and few administrative processes like handling of
incoming & outgoing mails.
Out of Scope Activities: AP, AR, GL
control, Controlling, Tax, Risk
Management FTEs outsourced by Sales, Factory and HQ
organizations:
Different Regional Scope diversity:
Region AP T&E AR GL Region Country AP AR GL Total
RBU WEST YES YES YES BOTH RBU WEST France, Holland 4 2.5 2.5 9
RBU CENTER YES NO YES BOTH RBU CENTER Austria, Germany, 5 4 2 11
RBU IBERIA (Sales) YES YES YES BOTH RBU IBERIA (Sales) Spain, Portugal 2.5 1.5 2 6
RBU IBERIA (Factory) YES NO YES BOTH RBU IBERIA (Factory) Spain 7 1.5 2.5 11
YES YES YES BOTH RBU Central Eastern Hungary, Czech Republic,
RBU CEE Europe Slovakia, Poland 3 3 3 9
Finland, Denmark, Norway,
YES NO YES BOTH RBU Nordics
RBU Nordics Sweden, Baltics 4.5 3.5 2 10
RBU East Russia, Ukraine, 0 0 0 0
RBU East NO NO NO NO RBU North (Sales) Great Britain 4 1 1 6
RBU North (Sales) YES YES YES BOTH RBU North (Factory) Great Britain 9 0 0 9
RBU North (Factory) YES YES NO NO RBU South Italy 1.5 0 0.5 2
RBU South YES YES NO BOTH HQ (Head Quarter) France, Switzerland 8 3 5 16
HQ YES BOTH YES BOTH Total 48.5 20 20.5 89
Date 18.3.09 8

9. Topics
Introduction to Nissan
Background of Outsourcing
Project Scope
Outsourcing Evolving
Business Service Centre
Project Learning's
Questions
Date 18.3.09 9

10. Outsourcing Evolving
Transformation
Standardisation High business
impact projects
Standard
process Focus on
Stabilisation definition & Value-add
Performance implementation Re-engineering
improvement
Implementation (new KPIs, level- Process of business’
Transition cont. up) oriented processes
organisation
Start Transition Production SPOT Business
Solutioning starts at (Supplier Paid Quality in focus partners
outsourcing On Time)
Training at Nissan company Productivity
CPOT improvement
& work shadowing (Customer Paid
Measurements On Time) End-to-end
PMs (Process (KPIs)
Maps) & SOPs process
Controllership
(Standard Operating Bench improvements
reduction Start of
Procedures) standardisation Technology
preparation with common
1st Transition workflow tool
‘05 ‘06 ‘07 ‘08 ‘09
Date 18.3.09 10

11. Start and implementation
Transition Measurements Bench Reduction
Achievements: Nissan feels out of control
No proper communication between BPO & Nissan
Production starts at BPO Provider
No baselining data to compare to new BPO
Setup Governance Structure at BPO Provider performance, only subjective at the time
Measurements: AP: Late payments to vendors
First KPI measurement in May 2006 Increased manual payments → duplicate payments
Increased coding errors
Concerns/ Issues: Missing invoices – vendors hesitant to send
Different activities on different ERP platforms invoices to BPO country
are outsourced by regions, which adds to Missing information on invoice: >20years
complexity and difficulty in standardization experience cannot be transitioned in a couple of
process months
Hired BPO FTE’s skill/experience are not No robust workflow tool and no common ERP
equivalent with Nissan FTEs – double registration
Email approval increases workload significantly at
Day to day operations not effectively
BPO provider
managed , backlogs and inefficient process
BPO can only manage with double workforce
compared to process prior to transition (bench) .
Date 18.3.09 11

12. Stabilisation
Performance
Projects Controllership Workflow tool
Improvement
Performance Improvement: Projects launched:
End to End KPIs introduced SPOT (Supplier Paid On Time) to increase
Increased number of KPIs and targets levels % of number of paid on time invoice from
28.6% to 53.1%
to encourage BPO provider to improve
CPOT (Customer Paid on Time) to
Monthly workshops introduced to improve
decrease unallocated cash from 1.8 Billion
communications
to an average of 30M with an incoming cash
Workflow tool: of average 75M daily
Design & deploy common workflow tool SCOA , SCCS structure and Cost center
interfaced to ERP system with standardized structure implementation
SCOA (Standard Chart of Account) and Roadmap to Green KPIs to achieve new
standard cost center structure KPI level
Biggest issues:
BPO provider is KPI driven and oriented – need to measure as much KPIs as possible to get
tasks done and drive process improvements
Huge attrition – 53% annualized
Date 18.3.09 12

13. Standardization
Standard process
Process oriented Productivity
definition & Quality in focus
organisation improvement
implementation
Standard process definition and Quality in Focus:
implementation: Best practice sharing in focus
Processes fully mapped in the light of Quality project: Debtor Vendor analysis, GR/IR
standardization account reconciliation
Redefined, simplified and streamlined processes Productivity Improvement:
Streamlined AP processes with standard Reduced processing time
document types Increased outsourced task without additional
Process oriented organization: cost to Nissan – without FTE increase
Reallocated tasks Increased Nissan Governance – number of FTE
Functional changes regarding work allocation to drive process/ productivity improvements
Functional operation and reporting
Redefined systems access rights in conjunction Process oriented organization is
with JSOX to drive down huge impact of
Created call centre environment for vendor &
attrition
customer calls
Date 18.3.09 13

14. Summary of Current BPO Performance
October 2008
All Activity Plan Actual Status Direction Target Confidence
Trend Mar09 Level
Roadmap to Green KPIs
* CSL* met 35 33 Stable 39
84% 94%
* ISL** met 36 29 Positive 43
* DBM*** met 16 5 Stable 27
Total KPIs met 87 67 Positive 109
# of exempted KPIs 0 7 Stable 0
# of missed KPIs (2 CSL, 3 ISL, 9 DBM) 0 13 Positive 0
# of unmeasured KPIs 14 14 Stable 0
# of not transitioned KPIs 8 8 Stable 0
* CSL – Critical Service Level, **ISL – Independent Service Level, ***DBM – Dashboard Metrics
Date 18.3.09 14

15. Account
Payable
Date 18.3.09 15

16. AP KPIs
Definitions of AP KPIs:
• TAT – Turn Around Time
• Wd – Working days
Date 18.3.09 * SOW – Statement of Work 16

17. AP - K2 Queues Definitions
Operational Definitions for K2 Reports
Stock in K2
Awaiting AP - Uploaded Invoices in K2, not in any state of processing
(untouched) –Not yet processed by AP team
Returned to AP - Invoices already entered into Financial System, sent for
clarification returned to AP for further processing
Awaiting Feedback - Invoices already entered into Financial System, waiting
for clarification/ payment approval all except for Payment Approval
Payment Approval - Invoices already entered into Financial System, waiting
for clarification/ payment approval Price Query and VAT Query
GL Approval – Invoices already entered & approved in Financial System
waiting to be released in K2 only.
Awaiting Rejection – Invoices to be rejected in K2
Secondary Classification – Invoices to be moved from one secondary
classification to another (incorrectly classified) within the same entity
Date 18.3.09 17

18. Main AP KPI SPOT & YTD Trend
Supplier Paid on Time Plan Actual Status Direction Target Confidence
Trend Mar09 Level
SPOT MTD (as part of Q3TD) 55.0% 53.1% Positive 65.0%
SPOT YTD 50.0% 48.8% Stable 50.0%
SPOT + 14 MTD (as part of Q3TD) 70.0% 70.0% Positive 75.0%
SPOT +14 YTD 70.0% 65.3% Stable 70.0%
Europe an YTD SPOT
100%
365<
80% 121-365
ent
061-120
aym
60% 031-060
SPOT Target
% of late P
015-030
40% 004-014
001-003
20% <1
0%
Apr il May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar
Date 18.3.09 18

19. Detailed AP Performance Report KPI Status
Achievements CSL Performance
40
CSL (24 Met v/s 24 in September. 96% met) Met # Missed # Exempt Not Yet Transitioned Not Measured #
Awaiting AP Met for 8 sites out of 10 also met for European 30
3
4
4
4 4 4 4 4
level 2 2
1
1
1
3 1 1
12 4
20 2 2 2 4 2 8 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Awaiting AP (T&E) Met for 6 sites out of 6 14 6 8 6 8 6 7
4
14 11
24 24
GL Release Met for all sites. also met for European level 10 17
17
20 21 20 20
13 15 14 14 13 16
10 12 12
ISL (9Met v/s 7 in September. Met 72%) 3 6
9
0
Returned to AP Met for 9 sites out of 10
20 7
08
20 7
08
20 7
08
20 7
08
20 7
08
20 7
08
20 7
08
20 7
08
20 7
08
20 8
09
20 8
09
20 8
09
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
DBM (1 met out of 3 measured) April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb March
Qulaity KPI was measured at NMGB this month and we
ISL Performance
50
were able to reach the target in the accuracy level (95%)
3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 6 2
4 1 1 1 1
40
14 12 12
16 16 17
18 20
Challenges 30 20 22 23 20
CSL (1 Missed v/s 1 in September) 20 5 3 2
28 30 29
6 25 1 26 1 25 1
Awaiting AP Missed for 2 site out of 10. European level 10 20 1
19 5
1
18 4
23 1
5 5 4 2 18 20
10 9
99% v/s target 98% (NITA* NNE) 0
6 7 6 6 7
ISL (2 Missed v/s 4 in September)
20 7
08
20 7
08
20 7
08
20 7
08
20 7
08
20 7
08
20 7
08
20 7
08
20 7
08
20 8
09
20 8
09
20 8
09
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
Supplier paid on time @ 48.76% for Europe v/s target of April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb March
50% DBM Performance
60
AP Ageing was missed as well (30% of the open items are
50
aged more than 10 days)
40
DBM 44 44 43 42 42 43 43 43 43 43
30 45 45
SRFP European level was missed (61,00% vs 70% target)
20
Total pending invoices in average was missed (8015 vs
10
target 6250) 10 13 10 13 10 11 10 10 10 10 12 10 10 10 8 9 8 8 8
0 1 2 1 03 2 3 1 3 3 12 4 3 4 4 4
09
20 8
09
20 7
20 8
09
20 8
08
20 7
08
20 7
08
20 7
08
20 7
08
20 7
08
08
20 7
08
20 7
20 7
08
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb March
Date 18.3.09 19

20. Example of Awaiting AP performance
Awaiting AP 98% within 5 WDs:
SOW* Target for Awaiting AP 98% within 5 WDs
(working days)
KPI Met for 9 out of 10 sites for week 44.
7 sites met for MTD Oct.
KPI for European level at 98%.
NNE – from the 7 items 3 of them were processed on
the 6th day, 4 of them were classified as disputed and at
processing time we reclassified as PO / Non PO invoice.
RBU Center – 6 invoices were classified as disputed and
were rejected from this status
Total invoices processed for Oct 23,783
* SOW – Statement of Work
Date 18.3.09 * SOW – Statement of Work 20

21. Next Step: Transformation
Re-engineering of
High business Focus on Value-
business Business Partners
impact projects add
processes
Next Steps on AP:
Simplify and streamline processes further and focus on Value-add reengineering business
processes
Introduce E-Invoicing
Improve PO coverage and quality in line with ‘No PO No pay’ policy
Introduce Duplicate Audit tool
Reduce processing time to as minimum as possible
Introduce work force on Debtor Vendor analysis, GR/IR account reconciliation
Further increase outsourced task without additional cost to Nissan – without FTE increase
Benchmark with other BPO providers and captive companies
New contractual agreement (SOW) – move toward transactional base KPIs rather than FTE base
Introduce robust quality KPIs
Date 18.3.09 21

22. Account
Receivable
Date 18.3.09 22

23. AR Weekly IRF Processing status
ASSC NESS 100.00%
NFE 100.00%
NISA 99.32%
NMPC 100.00%
INEU 100.00%
INUE 100.00%
•All the IRFs were parked within 5 WDs.
ASSC Total 99.58%
NMGB NMGB 100.00%
•Comments on pending IRFs:
NMGB Total 100.00%
RBU Center NAUS 100.00%
NGER 100.00% -RBU hhh – xxirfs are pending because of missing
NSWI 100.00% data. xx irfs are still in x workdays.
RBU Center Total 100.00%
RBU Iberia NPOR 100.00% -RBU hhhh – all the irf are still in x workdays.
NSPA 100.00%
RBU Iberia Total 100.00%
RBU Nordic NNDK 100.00%
NNNO 100.00%
RBU Nordic Total 100.00%
RBU West NFRA 100.00%
RBU West Total 100.00%
NSCEE NCCZ 100.00%
NCHU 100.00%
NCPL 100.00%
NCSK 100.00%
NSCEE Total 100.00%
Grand Total 99.92%
Entity NMGB RBU CEE RBU Center RBU Iberia RBU Nordic RBU West ASSC Grand Total
Total processed 564 211 27 26 128 90 238 1284
Total pending 30 0 110 82 12 0 0 234
Date 18.3.09 23

24. AR Ageing Summary 3rd party …(status by site by amounts only entities
where cash collection is performed by Genpact)
AR Aging
120,000,000.00
100,000,000.00
80,000,000.00
RBU CENTER
60,000,000.00
NSCEE
NNE
40,000,000.00
ASSC
20,000,000.00
-
Not Due 1-30 31-60 61-90 91-180 181-360 >361
(20,000,000.00)
Team Company Not Due 1-30 31-60 61-90 91-180 181-360 >361 Total Total Overdue
ASSC 53,721,888.44 15,242,203.40 8,906,584.64 4,340,305.51 512,472.45 5,802,475.83 6,860,836.28 95,386,769.00 41,664,878.11
NESS 2,419,381.12 1,376,344.26 77,468.32 (72,441.91) (1,195,700.00) 1,279,531.86 6,590,553.47 10,475,143.00 8,055,756.00
NFE 4,583,857.76 1,810,936.01 1,249,143.46 1,217,590.58 633,879.24 446,665.82 90,752.07 10,032,825.00 5,448,967.18
NISA 46,618,649.56 12,054,923.13 7,578,722.60 3,194,359.46 1,067,797.38 2,970,319.52 (205,126.87) 73,279,641.00 26,660,995.22
NMPC 100,000.00 - (267.75) - - 54.59 499,892.08 599,679.00 499,678.92
PLC - - 1,518.01 797.38 6,495.83 1,105,904.04 (115,234.47) 999,481.00 999,480.79
NNE 30,828,235.27 813,207.09 2,905,949.64 1,148,305.19 2,418,623.73 636,829.06 215,129.41 38,966,273.00 8,138,044.12
NNDK 9,410,268.55 (245,618.24) 1,728,425.74 (718,748.14) 1,809,893.09 159,411.51 6,297.03 12,149,930.00 2,739,660.99
NNEE 208,702.58 217,966.89 14,289.60 68,208.07 15,108.95 982.40 885.19 526,143.00 317,441.10
NNFI 7,207,333.29 (224,291.56) (32,295.25) 106,258.67 (16,711.59) (96,229.77) 4,319.59 6,948,385.00 (258,949.91)
NNLT 236,305.17 98,640.42 11,673.68 23,308.67 55,805.60 40,415.25 (5,000.00) 461,149.00 224,843.62
NNLV 80,586.37 418,611.07 82,794.60 104,506.76 84,013.41 (731.76) (418.30) 769,362.00 688,775.78
NNNO 6,097,082.14 271,323.37 529,742.20 606,756.32 288,863.80 49,602.58 15,036.74 7,858,404.00 1,761,325.01
NNSE 7,587,957.17 276,575.14 571,319.07 958,014.84 181,650.47 483,378.85 194,009.16 10,252,900.00 2,664,947.53
NSCEE 699,921.43 4,946,346.70 2,667,379.36 2,091,924.94 5,230,312.16 1,149,707.66 3,941,770.05 20,727,366.87 20,027,440.87
NCCZ 562,177.97 1,306,455.84 694,535.59 262,475.46 1,124,726.27 484,818.38 119,212.22 4,554,406.00 3,992,223.76
NCHU 780,245.20 1,347,236.10 667,181.67 576,609.58 434,698.91 (30,316.04) 1,586,330.41 5,361,985.87 4,581,740.63
NCPL (851,408.97) 1,871,010.38 894,695.15 881,002.61 2,724,697.54 288,954.67 1,720,459.85 7,529,412.00 8,380,820.20
NCSK 208,907.23 421,644.38 410,966.95 371,837.29 946,189.44 406,250.65 515,767.57 3,281,563.00 3,072,656.28
RBU CENTER 26,770,910.08 396,445.14 (276,436.60) 75,945.07 1,402,902.39 656,596.55 (1,916,486.44) 27,109,864.00 338,966.11
NAUS 15,236.23 (397,234.10) 22,581.53 17,210.32 3,638.30 20,100.00 (39,624.29) (358,096.00) (373,328.24)
NGER 22,385,116.29 980,700.21 (157,539.90) 538.31 1,310,102.49 604,337.13 (1,858,351.33) 23,264,903.00 879,786.91
NSWI 4,370,557.56 (187,020.97) (141,478.23) 58,196.44 89,161.60 32,159.42 (18,510.82) 4,203,057.00 (167,492.56)
Grand Total 112,020,955.22 21,398,202.33 14,203,477.04 7,656,480.71 9,564,310.73 8,245,609.10 9,101,249.30 182,190,272.87 70,169,329.21
•Global overdue is at 38%, 49% older than 60 days. Issues faced in ageing due dates of parts invoices and miscellaneous. Invoice states at SAP
as overdue, but as per agreement with customer they are still not overdue.
•Reporting includes all types of invoices financed and not financed.
•Collection proposal for Spain is still not accepted. WEST, NMGB, NITA and NMUK are not in scope.
Date 18.3.09 24

25. Overdue items 3rd party – trend by site
Weekly trend by site
€ 130M
€ 105M
€ 80M
€ 55M
€ 30M
€ 5M
-€ 20M
39/08 40/08 41/08 42/08 43/08 44/08 45/08 46/08 47/08 48/08 49/08 50/08 1/09 2/09 3/09 4/09 5/09 6/9 7/9
Total 92.83 67.29 60.41 40.84 58.66 88.80 70.45 71.37 70.08 90.54 93.65 68.53 120.37 100.58 87.28 87.11 90.06 61.08 70.14
RBU Center 3.66 4.70 2.22 -15.18 -6.16 4.80 -5.17 0.83 2.03 7.54 -0.94 -0.04 3.97 0.82 -6.22 -1.48 6.83 -4.67 0.33
NSCEE 45.88 16.40 17.87 20.85 20.73 28.58 23.28 23.91 24.63 30.55 27.10 19.27 22.53 19.73 28.94 25.44 23.81 21.44 20.02
NNE 4.57 8.25 3.59 -0.68 1.28 7.21 9.09 9.57 8.14 8.29 8.00 6.15 12.12 9.47 12.35 3.18 2.93 0.22 8.13
ASSC 38.72 37.94 36.73 35.85 42.81 48.21 43.25 37.06 35.28 44.16 59.49 43.15 81.75 70.56 52.21 59.97 56.49 44.09 41.66
•Increased in the NNNN region (8 MM )
Date 18.3.09 25

26. AR - Definitions
Operational Definitions
• Manual Invoice: Miscellaneous invoices
• Invoice request: Filled out by NISSAN company and the approved,
checked form sent to Outsourced for processing
• Open requests: IRF not parked into SAP
• Unallocated cash: all the incoming payments posted to the AR
accounts and are not cleared yet
Date 18.3.09 26

27. Treasury
Date 18.3.09 27

28. TREASURY - Unapplied Cash by sites /AP/debit & credit items/ absolute
EUR value
Main allocated cash (49%) is www
Decreased by kkkK since last week. Recap invoices have been booked as payment items at ppp, to
be cleared by month end.
Unapplied Cash - Weekly trend by site
€ 2,000M
€ 1,000M
€ 0M
02 Dec 8 Dec 15 Dec 05 Jan 12 Jan 19 Jan 26 Jan 2 Feb 10 Feb 16 Feb
Total 1,963.0 1,907.8 1,317.4 619.00 626.75 555.47 500.09 523.97 575.97 575.19
RBU West 367.77 250.74 239.55 195.00 173.07 161.22 161.94 161.72 169.27 165.98
RBU Iberia 12.79 10.82 11.88 18.22 16.37 19.26 18.96 15.30 13.30 14.11
RBU Centre 1,076.5 1,139.4 715.15 12.38 74.40 73.00 18.87 21.70 75.55 72.11
NNE 2.08 3.44 3.71 4.65 5.16 5.26 5.79 6.08 4.40 4.32
NMGB 10.98 10.66 10.24 15.69 16.33 16.41 21.14 21.03 20.36 21.13
CEE 26.47 32.69 34.29 39.93 37.43 44.78 18.22 25.22 25.22 16.98
ASSC 466.38 460.00 302.61 333.13 303.99 235.53 255.18 272.91 267.86 280.58
As per 16/02
Date 18.3.09 28

29. General
Ledger
Date 18.3.09 29

30. Nissan GL weekly performance 2009 W5
Results / next steps:
yyyy: open items follow up, reminder was sent to site to
clarify not booked items on yyyy. pppp will follow on WD1 TTTTTTTTTT Csilla A. is working on the reconciliation. Agreed
rrrr: official communication was sent to the sites to start with PPPPPPP that cut off date will be applied (~Apr,2007:
sending their open item list to be able to close books on netting before that date; item by item recs after that date)
WD3. Scope of reconciled countries are extended
(Intra/Inter) KPI Status
All work-files and finalized FAPs will be copied to shared Posting ME JE December (quarterly closing)
drive ‘J’ for which NNNNNN team has access. E-mail 100% in line with MECS CSL
exchange would decrease significantly and response time
Number of JEs processed by GL-team: 546 vs. 363
also
(Nov.)
VAT-clearing project: DET sent status-update to Pascale
tttttttt: 230 (167M EUR)
W., waiting for information from their side
ttttttt: 203 (11590M EUR)
GRIR: reporting of not touched items changed to be more
accurate on data. Final report on W6. uuuuuuu: 44 (14.9M EUR)
kkkkkk: 25 (5.9M EUR)
…
Status of Account Reconciliation December: Expected nr. Of JEs in Jan: ~400
Nr. of not approved: 22 (or 13% of 167) Not Started In progress
In progress / waiting for feedback Sub for Approval (eroom upload)
Alicia FFFF 8 (8) Approved in eroom Rejected
Antonio DDDD 7 (7) 180
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 5 5 5 5 3 3 3 3
0
Eva MMMMMM 5 (5) 160
30
5 5
40 39 40
Raquel TTTT 1 (1) 140
64
Pascale WWWW1 (57) 120 86 86
N O o f a c c o u n ts
0
Data as of 2nd of February 100 135
141
148 135 135 139 139 139 139 139 140 140 140
167 165
80
137 63
127 128 127
60
40 75 75
0
2
20 40 28
2 21 21 21 21 21 21 23 22 22 22
24
14
0 4 0 0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0 2
0
WD1 WD2 WD3 WD4 WD5 WD6 WD7 WD8 WD9 WD10 WD11 WD12 WD13 WD14 WD15 WD16 WD17 WD18 WD19 WD20 WD21 WD22
workdays
Date 18.3.09 30

31. Topics
Introduction to Nissan
Background of Outsourcing
Project Scope
Outsourcing Evolving
Business Service Centre
Project Learning's 1
Questions
Date 18.3.09 31

32. If it were 2005 now, how
would Nissan decide?
Yes to outsourcing,
but with a different approach
Date 18.3.09 32

33. Topics
Introduction to Nissan
Background of Outsourcing
Project Scope
Outsourcing Evolving
Business Service Centre
Project Learning's
Questions
Date 18.3.09 33

34. The business services concept
proposal is to create a CAPTIVE
Business services ≠
(internal) business services group, with
OUTSOURCING NE employees.
Business services ≠ No labor arbitrage included in the
LOW COST COUNTRIES business case. No LCC considered
Low value added tasks already outsourced
Business services ≠
The idea of the business services Center is to
LOW VALUE ADDED TASKS consolidate NE EXPERTISE
Business services = CONSOLIDATION OF NE EXPERTISE
Date 18.3.09 34

35. The Finance organization 3 levels
Local Level Business services level Headquoters -level
•Support and control the •Provide accounting services •Support European
business (Data production (Standardized accounting processes are management
work is pooled in the allocated to business services) •Define Financial
business services •Manage Master data and is the processes guidelines and standards
organization removing the owner •Assess and support
distraction from the •Provide performance reporting data (all European projects
business) axis : product / entity / function) •Monitor performance
•Financial director in •Support the preparation of the budget
charge of …..with the •Manage Budgeting
support of the business •Provide Tax and treasury expertise and process (top down)
services group activities
•Provide Product costing, gross margin
and profitability analysis expertise
All teams are there to support Nissan to meet its strategic objectives
Date 18.3.09 35

36. Business services principles
Each service should have its price. The business can
Price transparency
determine how much service it wants at that price
Business Manage the service like a business, not a fixed cost. Serve
management internal and potentially external customers
Market Provide the service levels the businesses want, not the levels
responsiveness staff think they need
Best practices
Identify and deploy Best practices quickly and globally
proliferation
Process Develop streamlined process standards that can be
strandardization maintained and improve quickly
Treat business units like customers, offering services they
Service culture
value and charging for each
Date 18.3.09 36

37. Topics
Introduction to Nissan
Background of Outsourcing
Project Scope
Outsourcing Evolving
Business Service Centre
Project Learning's 2
Questions
Date 18.3.09 37

38. Ideal organization structure design principle : business
services
In (many companies) Nissan
Finance
Finance
Finance
Finance
Finance
Finance
Master data
Business process
owners
Systems ownership
Outsourcers
Business
Business
contract Mgt
services
services
Logical Grouping of
dispersed activities
Business
services
Out Outsourcer Out Outsourcer Outsourcer
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Current Ideal
Date 18.3.09 38

39. Project Learning's General
Key Key
Findings Recommendations
‘Ship and fix’ transition method applied: ‘Fix and Ship’ approach: Create a Nissan CoE
Aim was reap immediate savings from first and after fixing all the processes in the CoE,
Transition offshore centralization then drive to best ship what really can be outsourced as it has no
in class added value for Nissan (or Nissan can not add
Cost saving was the biggest driver at value)….
Nissan - pay back period just over a SOL ID team should remain the transition team
year Establish Incentive Plan to middle management
Team consistency during SOL ID and and trainers
migration changed Do not lay off current staff before process is
stabilized, provide them with incentives to make
Lack of middle management Buy-in from the process stabilized asap
Nissan plus lack of confidence in Take training and preparation of SOPs seriously –
releasing control SOP preparation not to be done by BPO
SOL ID was prepared too quickly and as associates
a result at a high level. SOP was Request BPO to add Bench proactively to the
prepared by BPO associates amount of associates, invest upfront into
Nissan FTE does not equal BPO FTE transition and release associates when process is
No dashboard/ Metrics stabilized
Baselining before deciding on migrating tasks
As KPIs are contractual and leading to If decision is made to outsource and no
KPIs penalties in case not met, BPO experience in outsourcing, request 3rd party
provider did not advise Nissan on consulting firm to advise / benchmark on
‘good’ KPIs KPIs and pricing methodology
• CoE -Centre of Excellence
Date 18.3.09 39

40. Project Learning's General 2
Key Key
Findings Recommendations
BPO & Nissan do not have the same SOW pricing/ invoicing to be determined by number
objectives due to FTE based pricing of transactions and KPIs which reflect the Win/Win
Process With current FTE pricing BPO provider objectives by creating a situation where the BPO will
Improvement is not ‘interested’ in real process focus on reducing and simplifying the work without
improvements, which can lead to being punished through lower income
decrease in number of FTE Gained Share to be introduced to drive Process
Improvements on End-to-End processes
Process Improvement team to be lead and financed
by Customer (Nissan) and not only by BPO Provider
Decide what’s more important: Cost: go for low cost BPO provider
Strategy on Cost or Quality Quality: go for cost+ BPO provider working
Outsourcing with Consultants
Cost and Quality: go for captive, create
Centre of Excellence via investing in an
experienced accounting force to drive process
improvements
Date 18.3.09 40

41. Project Learning's A/P
Key Key
Findings Recommendations
Accounts Payable process must be Workflow Solution and common ERP system to
standardized across Europe prior to be in place prior to migration or at least at the
Account migration start of migration
Payables Necessary to have single workflow Prior to migrating tasks, all processes must be
solution process- mapped and written SOP signed off
No central AP control and responsibility by Finance Managers and transferred to
Standard processes
Setup central AP controlling function with full
authority
Setup Functional organization before job
transitioned
Date 18.3.09 41

42. Project Learning's A/R
Key Key
Findings Recommendations
Common ERP system to be in place prior to
Accounts Accounts Receivable process must be
migration or at least at the start of migration
standardized across Europe prior to
Receivable migration
Prior to migrating tasks, all processes must be
process- mapped and written SOP signed off
No single workflow solution by Finance Managers and transferred to
Not the same ERP implemented per Standard processes
regions Agree that same tasks to be outsourced from
Not the same tasks outsourced each region to BPO
Without workflow tool measurement of Cash collection to be outsourced to real ‘cash
KPIs are manual and done by BPO collector’ companies
provider Customer account reconciliation to be
developed by Nissan prior to or during
Cash collections : customer financing
migration, otherwise task by BPO is not well
methodology is not recorded in ERP
performed
Cash collection is either not in scope or
Setup Functional organization before job
FTE requirement is not well defined
transitioned
Customer account reconciliation is not
well defined for BPO
Date 18.3.09 42

43. Project Learning's Treasury
Key Key
Findings Recommendations
Treasury Not the same tasks outsourced
KPI for Cash allocation is measured by Prior to migrating tasks, all processes
quantitative wise, no quality must be process- mapped and written
measurement SOP signed off by Finance Managers
Payment Run – different processes and and transferred to Standard processes
task outsourced to BPO provider by Agree that same tasks to be outsourced
region from each region to BPO
Different banks are used by regions – Standardize bank usage on European
different accesses are provided to BPO if level
any Centralize payment run responsibility
Different Payment run schedule per
regions Manual payments to be kept at the very
Increased number of manual payments minimal
due to AP insufficiency
Date 18.3.09 43

44. Project Learning's G/L
Key Key
Findings Recommendations
General Not the same tasks outsourced GL task as require deep accounting
Account reconciliation outsourced by knowledge , should have not been
Ledger outsourced
different region – requires huge amount
of time investment by Nissan to provide
all Account details to BPO provider
Date 18.3.09 44

45. Topics
Introduction to Nissan
Background of Outsourcing
Project Scope
Outsourcing Evolving
Business Service Centre
Project Learning's
Questions
Date 18.3.09 45

46. Questions?
http://www.nissan-europe.com/
Date 18.3.09 46