Which Functions to Move to a GCC First: A Practical Scoring Framework

Choosing the functions to move to a GCC is one of the earliest and most consequential decisions in GCC setup. The functions you choose determine the talent you need, the cities that can supply it, the total cost of ownership and how quickly the center can show value.

Many enterprises start with whatever looks easiest to relocate. A stronger approach scores each candidate function on strategic value, talent availability, process maturity, scalability, cost and risk, then sequences the GCC’s scope in waves. This article gives you that scoring framework, a comparison of single function and multi-function launches, and the questions to resolve before committing.

Key Takeaways

• A GCC function strategy defines which business capabilities a Global Capability Center will own, support or build, and in what order.
• The best first functions combine strategic relevance, available talent, well documented processes and room to scale.
• Function choice and location choice are linked. A city that suits finance operations may not have the depth for AI engineering.
• Sequencing in waves reduces transition risk and lets the GCC earn credibility before taking on complex work.
• Scoring functions against weighted, current data is more reliable than relying on precedent or a one-time consulting study.

What Is a GCC Function Strategy?

A GCC function strategy is the plan that defines which business functions and capabilities a Global Capability Center will own, support or develop, and the sequence in which they will be introduced.

It answers three questions: what should the GCC own on day one, what should it own next, and which capabilities can grow into strategic value over time. It also sets the talent, location and investment requirements that follow from those choices.

Functions Commonly Moved to GCCs

Most GCC portfolios draw from a familiar set of functions, although the mix is shifting toward technology and AI:

• Technology and IT, including infrastructure, applications and platform engineering
• Product engineering and R&D
• Data, analytics and AI
• Cybersecurity
• Finance and accounting, including FP&A
• Human resources and talent operations
• Procurement and supply chain
• Customer operations
• Digital and process transformation

The EY GCC Pulse Survey 2025 reports that 51% of surveyed GCCs plan to expand their functional scope in the next 12 months. That makes the sequencing question relevant for existing centers as well as new ones.

Why You Should Not Move Every Function at Once

Launching a broad, multi-function GCC on day one multiplies complexity across hiring, transition, leadership, technology and knowledge transfer.

Each function brings its own stakeholders, systems and undocumented knowledge. Running several transitions in parallel stretches the leadership team and makes it harder to diagnose problems. Early failures in one function can also damage headquarters’ confidence in the whole center.

A phased approach lets the GCC stabilize one capability, build credibility and then expand. For example, an enterprise might begin with technology and analytics, then add finance, procurement or cybersecurity once the operating model is proven.

6 Criteria for Prioritizing Functions for a GCC

1. Strategic importance

Ask whether the function supports the enterprise’s most important priorities. Functions tied to digital transformation, product development, data, AI or cybersecurity often justify a different GCC approach than highly standardized transactional work. The aim is to build capabilities that matter, not to relocate activity.

2. Talent availability

A function is only viable if the required skills can be hired and retained at the planned scale. Evaluate talent pool size, specialized skill depth, hiring velocity, experience levels, salary benchmarks, competition from other employers and attrition.

This criterion varies most between cities. Talent depth for advanced engineering, AI or cybersecurity is concentrated in fewer markets than talent for finance or customer operations. Aokah’s Talent Wisdom provides current talent availability and salary benchmark data across locations, so function plans are tested against the real market.

3. Process maturity and transferability

Standardized, well documented processes are easier to transfer than those that depend on tacit knowledge and informal decisions. Before moving a function, establish how the process works today, who owns it, how standardized it is, what knowledge is undocumented and how dependent it is on headquarters.

Low maturity does not rule a function out, but it raises the effort needed for GCC knowledge transfer and should push it to a later wave.

4. Scalability

Favor functions that can grow meaningfully within the GCC. A function with a small, fixed workload offers limited long-term value. Capabilities such as engineering, analytics, cybersecurity and transformation can grow into large, strategic organizations.

5. Cost and total cost of ownership

Labor arbitrage is only one part of the business case. A full GCC TCO view includes salaries and benefits, real estate, technology, transition costs, parallel running, leadership and governance overheads, and cost escalation over several years. Functions with high transition effort or scarce talent can erode expected savings. Aokah’s TCO Simulator and Cost Projection tools model these costs by function and city.

6. Risk and compliance

Some functions carry regulatory, data privacy or concentration risk that shapes where and how they can operate. Consider data residency rules, industry regulation, business continuity needs and the impact of disruption. High risk functions may need stronger controls, a secondary location or a later wave.

A GCC Function Prioritization Scorecard

Score each candidate function from 1 to 5 on every criterion, then apply weights that reflect your enterprise’s priorities. The example weights below are illustrative, not a recommendation.

Functions with high scores become wave one. Functions with high strategic value but low process maturity often become wave two, after documentation and transition planning. Functions with low scores across the board may not belong in the GCC at all.

The weights matter as much as the scores. A cost-led program and an innovation-led program will rank the same functions differently. Testing several weighting scenarios before committing shows how sensitive the decision is to those assumptions.

Single Function vs. Multi-Function GCC: Which Should You Start With?

There is no universal answer. The right starting scope depends on business priorities, available talent, expected scale, transition complexity and leadership capacity.

Many enterprises start with one or two anchor functions and design the operating model so additional functions can be added without restructuring.

How Function Choice Shapes GCC Location and Execution

Function strategy, location strategy and execution planning should be decided together. The functions you choose determine the talent profile, which narrows the cities that can supply it. The city then shapes cost, risk, infrastructure and hiring timelines.

A practical decision chain looks like this:

Function → Talent requirements → Location → TCO → Execution plan → Scale

For example, an advanced engineering center needs a city with a strong technology ecosystem and competitive senior talent. A finance operations center may be better served by a city with deep accounting talent, multilingual skills and lower attrition.

Traditional approaches often analyze these steps separately, using different spreadsheets, vendors and reports. Aokah’s Explorer brings them together. Teams can run City Recommendations for a function’s talent profile, use City Comparison across 120+ cities and more than 150 parameters, and adjust decision weights to test alternatives. Once scope and location are set, Aokah Builder turns them into role architecture, hiring plans and an orchestrated execution program with human approval gates.

Moving From Functions to Capabilities

The most mature GCC strategies look past individual processes to the capability each function can become.

Instead of asking “Which finance activities can we move?”, ask “Can the GCC become our finance analytics and transformation capability?” The same logic applies elsewhere: IT support can grow into technology engineering, reporting into advanced analytics, and transaction processing into process transformation.

Designing initial scope with that trajectory in mind makes later expansion easier. For more on that evolution, see our guide to GCC transformation strategy.

Questions to Answer Before You Finalize GCC Scope

• Which functions most directly support enterprise priorities over the next three to five years?
• Where does the required talent exist, and how competitive is that market?
• How documented and standardized are the candidate processes?
• What does the multiyear TCO look like once transition costs are included?
• What regulatory or data constraints apply?
• How quickly can the team be built, and who will lead it?
• Which functions become wave two and wave three?

Conclusion: Choose Scope With Evidence, Then Sequence It

The right first functions for a GCC are not always the most obvious. They are the functions that score well on strategic value, talent, maturity, scalability, cost and risk, and they fit a location that can support them.

Scoring functions with current data, testing different weighting scenarios and connecting scope to location and execution helps enterprises build a GCC that starts strong and grows with the business.