When expanding, do you build everything local—or scale from the center? The answer isn’t binary.
As ceramic, glass, and refractory companies scale globally, they face a structural dilemma: should you create standalone operations in each new country—or manage them through centralized shared services?
Each model has cost, speed, and control trade-offs. The key is knowing which functions to replicate, and which to consolidate.
What Works Best as Shared Services
Finance and Treasury: Centralize banking, FX hedging, and cash forecasting
IT and ERP: Maintain one core platform with local modules
Global Procurement: Consolidate raw material and logistics contracting
These are repeatable, standardizable, and benefit from scale.
What Works Best Locally
Sales and Account Management: Trust is regional. Field reps should speak the language—literally and culturally.
Regulatory Compliance: Certifications, product labeling, customs handling must be localized.
Technical Field Support: Especially for refractories or high-precision ceramics, support must be regionally based.
These roles require nuance, speed, and on-the-ground adaptation.
Hybrid Structures to Consider
Regional Hubs: Centralize within regions (e.g., ASEAN hub in Malaysia, GCC hub in UAE)
Rotational Engineers: Fly global tech staff into new markets for install and training
Remote Customer Support with localized escalation teams
The model should evolve as the market matures.
Key Risk: Local Teams Feeling Disempowered
Too much central control breeds resentment. Shared services work only when:
SLAs are clear and responsive
Feedback loops are fast
Local teams still “own” customer outcomes
Think shared services, not shared excuses.
Global operations need consistency—but local markets need agility. By blending shared service efficiency with regional autonomy, you get the best of both worlds: scale, without stagnation.
