India's global capability center landscape has entered a distinctly more mature phase.
For global enterprises, the conversation is no longer centred primarily on access to talent, operational efficiency or the advantages of establishing a presence in India. GCCs are increasingly contributing to transformation, innovation and end-to-end business capabilities, while assuming greater responsibility for enterprise outcomes.
This evolution brings a more strategic question into focus: Is the GCC being structured around what the business requires today, or around what the enterprise expects it to become?
An operating structure designed for the early stages of a GCC may not remain effective as the centre assumes broader responsibilities and greater ownership.
The operating model should reflect the enterprise ambition
GCC operating models vary significantly in the degree of autonomy, decision-making authority and accountability assigned to the centre.
Some organisations maintain close alignment with headquarters, with strategic and policy decisions remaining largely centralised. Others place greater decision-making authority within their India centres. Hybrid structures combine elements of both, retaining enterprise-level direction while expanding responsibility at the GCC level.
EY's 2026 research on GCC operating models reflects this diversity. At its 2025 GCC conclave in Pune, 68% of participating GCC leaders indicated a preference for hybrid structures that balance enterprise control with greater responsibility at the GCC level.
The choice of structure should ultimately be anchored in the role the GCC is expected to play within the enterprise. A centre focused primarily on execution requires a different combination of leadership, governance, talent and decision rights from one expected to own global products, platforms, technology functions or business processes.
Establishing that direction early creates greater clarity around the capabilities and operating structures required to support it.
Greater ownership does not require every capability to be built internally
As GCCs assume broader responsibilities, organisations must make deliberate choices about which capabilities should reside internally and where external expertise can accelerate development.
Greater ownership does not necessarily require complete self-sufficiency.
An enterprise can retain strategic control of its GCC while working with specialised partners to establish teams, develop capabilities, support transformation programs or access expertise that would otherwise take considerable time to build internally.
The decision should be based on the strategic importance of the capability, the depth of expertise already available within the organisation and the speed at which the business needs to execute.
Core capabilities that differentiate the enterprise may warrant deeper internal ownership. In other areas, specialised external expertise can provide flexibility, accelerate execution and complement the strengths already established within the GCC.
The objective is to build an operating ecosystem in which internal and external capabilities serve clearly defined roles.
BOT can provide a structured path towards ownership
For organisations that intend to own and operate their India capability but require support during establishment and initial operations, Build-Operate-Transfer can provide a structured route.
Under a BOT approach, a partner supports the establishment of the required capability, operates it through an agreed period and subsequently transitions responsibility to the enterprise.
Its strategic value extends beyond accelerating setup. A well-structured BOT arrangement can enable an organisation to establish local teams and operating processes while progressively developing the maturity required for direct ownership.
For this transition to work effectively, governance, talent continuity, knowledge transfer, performance expectations and transition responsibilities need to be considered from the outset.
The effectiveness of BOT should therefore be measured not only by how successfully the capability is established, but by how well the enterprise is positioned to own and scale it following the transfer.
The partnership conversation needs to move beyond capacity
As GCC responsibilities become more strategic, the criteria for selecting technology and operating partners should become more rigorous.
The conversation should extend beyond the ability to provide talent or meet an immediate delivery requirement. Organisations should assess whether a partner understands the business context, can assemble the right capabilities, integrates effectively with internal teams and can remain accountable for clearly defined outcomes.
Different business priorities may require different forms of engagement. Establishing a new capability may require broader operational support. A technology transformation may call for specialised engineering expertise aligned to a defined objective. In other situations, the requirement may simply be access to niche capabilities that complement an established internal team.
This shifts the emphasis from the volume of external support to the value that support creates.
For GCC leaders, the more relevant question is therefore not how much a partner can take on, but whether the partnership strengthens the capabilities and outcomes the enterprise considers strategically important.
Build for where the GCC is going
As India's GCC ecosystem continues to mature, operating-model decisions will increasingly influence the strategic value these centres create for their global enterprises.
The discussion therefore needs to extend beyond location, headcount and speed of establishment. Leadership teams need a clear view of the responsibilities the GCC will assume, the capabilities required to support them, the degree of ownership that should reside within the centre and where external expertise can accelerate progress.
BOT can provide a structured transition towards ownership for organisations that require it. Specialised partnerships can strengthen particular capabilities or transformation priorities. Direct ownership may be appropriate where the enterprise already has the necessary foundations.
These are ultimately different routes towards the same objective: building a GCC capable of delivering against the role the enterprise has defined for it.
The next GCC advantage will come not simply from establishing capability in India, but from building the structure, ownership and partnerships required to turn that capability into sustained enterprise value.