Shared Services Design
Shared services work when the operating model is designed right from the start. ClarityArc defines the service scope, governance, sourcing model, and capability boundaries that determine whether a shared services function actually reduces cost and improves quality — or just centralizes the problem.
Shared services are not a cost-cutting measure. They are an operating model decision — and most organizations treat them like the former.
The typical shared services failure starts with centralizing a function before defining what it is actually supposed to do, who it serves, and how its performance will be measured. Without clear capability boundaries, service agreements, and a governance model that gives business units meaningful recourse, shared services becomes a cost center with no accountability — and business units route around it at the first opportunity.
ClarityArc designs shared services operating models grounded in business architecture principles: defined capability scope, clear service levels, a governance structure that balances standardization with business unit flexibility, and a sourcing model matched to the organization's actual scale and risk profile.
Three models. One right answer for your organization.
The first decision in any shared services design engagement is choosing the right structural model. ClarityArc evaluates three options against your organization's scale, risk profile, and strategic priorities before any design work begins.
Dedicated Internal Function
A centralized internal unit that delivers defined services to business units under formal service level agreements. The SSC owns its capabilities, headcount, and technology — with costs recovered through a chargeback or allocation model. Best suited to organizations with sufficient scale to justify a dedicated function and strong executive will to standardize.
Standards & Capability Hub
A central function that owns standards, methodology, and specialized capability — but does not deliver transactional services. Business units retain local execution while drawing on the CoE for expertise, governance, and quality assurance. Better suited to knowledge-intensive functions where standardization of practice matters more than standardization of delivery.
Centralized Core, Local Flex
A tiered model where high-volume, standardizable services are centralized while functions requiring local knowledge or relationship remain distributed. The most common model for mid-market organizations that cannot justify a full SSC but need more consistency than a CoE alone provides. Requires careful boundary definition to avoid the worst of both models.
Four steps to a shared services model your organization will actually use.
ClarityArc's shared services design methodology moves from scope definition through operating model design, governance, and transition planning — in that order. Skipping any step is the most common reason shared services functions underperform.
Capability Scoping & Current-State Assessment
A structured assessment of which capabilities are candidates for shared services — evaluated against current cost, performance, standardizability, and strategic fit. Includes a current-state view of where duplication exists, what it costs, and what the business case for consolidation actually looks like before any model is chosen.
Model Selection & Operating Model Design
Selection of the appropriate service model — SSC, CoE, or hybrid — based on scope, scale, and organizational readiness. Full operating model design covering organizational structure, service catalog, SLA framework, performance metrics, chargeback or allocation methodology, and technology requirements.
Governance Framework & Service Agreements
A governance model that gives shared services clear accountability without removing meaningful recourse from business units. Includes escalation paths, dispute resolution, performance review cadences, and the decision rights framework that keeps the function from becoming either a black box or a political battleground.
Transition Roadmap & Readiness Planning
A sequenced, risk-managed transition plan covering staffing, technology, process migration, and change management. Designed to move the organization from current state to the target model without creating service disruption during the transition — with defined milestones and go/no-go criteria at each phase.
Four deliverables. One complete operating model.
Every shared services design engagement produces a complete set of outputs — from business case through implementation roadmap — that your leadership and HR or finance teams can carry directly into execution.
Shared Services Business Case
A structured cost-benefit analysis that quantifies the current cost of duplication, the investment required to stand up the shared services model, the projected savings, and the break-even timeline — with scenario analysis across the model options considered.
Operating Model & Service Catalog
A complete operating model for the shared services function — covering organizational structure, reporting lines, headcount model, service catalog with defined scope for each service, SLA framework, performance metrics, and chargeback or allocation methodology.
Governance Framework
The governance model that keeps the shared services function accountable — including decision rights, escalation paths, service review cadences, dispute resolution process, and the performance management framework that links service delivery to outcomes the business actually cares about.
Transition Roadmap
A phased implementation plan that sequences the transition from current state to target model — covering staffing and recruitment, technology enablement, process migration, change management, and the communication plan for business units affected by the transition.
Before and after a well-designed shared services model.
The gap between a shared services function that captures its projected benefits and one that becomes a source of organizational friction almost always traces back to how the operating model was designed — not how it was executed.
Most shared services models are designed by HR or finance. The best ones are designed as operating models.
| Dimension | Typical Approach | ClarityArc Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Scope Definition | Everything in the function is centralized by default — scope is defined by organizational chart, not by capability analysis | Scope defined through structured capability assessment — only capabilities that are genuinely standardizable and scalable are centralized |
| Service Levels | SLAs defined as aspirational targets with no consequence for underperformance — business units have no recourse when service is poor | SLAs defined with business unit input, tied to performance metrics, and backed by a governance model with real escalation paths and consequences |
| Cost Recovery | Chargeback model built on allocation percentages that business units cannot trace to actual service consumption — creates resentment | Cost recovery model designed for transparency — business units can see what they are consuming and why it costs what it costs |
| Sourcing | Internal vs. outsourced decision made based on cost alone — organizational context, quality risk, and transition complexity underweighted | Sourcing decision evaluated across cost, quality, risk, and transition complexity — with a hybrid model considered when appropriate |
| Transition | Transition treated as an IT and HR project — business unit change management deprioritized until adoption problems emerge | Transition designed as an organizational change program with structured communication, stakeholder engagement, and phased go-live milestones |
What organizations ask before starting a shared services design engagement.
Business Architecture Consulting
View the full practice →Ready to Build a Shared Services Model That Actually Captures Its Projected Value?
ClarityArc designs shared services operating models for mid-market and enterprise organizations across energy, banking, and industrial sectors in Canada and the US.