– Mr. Cherian Sankey, Group Managing Director — Strategy & Innovation
In 2026, the total GCC count in India stands at approximately 2,000, and by 2030, this number is expected to increase exponentially to 5,000, as per an estimate by Deloitte. For this number to materialise, adequate specialised real estate is the first requirement. However, the decreasing vacancy in office leasing complicates the story and highlights the leap that GCC real estate needs to take to meet the projected boom in GCCs in India. In this context, project governance can act as a key catalyst in efficiently translating this GCC demand into predictable project delivery.
Getting the Fundamentals Right
Project governance enters the picture even before the capital is committed to develop a GCC office, and starts with the question: whether a proposed facility can meet the business requirement within realistic cost and time parameters. Several key decisions are made as part of this assessment. Location selection must account for talent availability, the supporting infrastructure must meet the centre’s power, connectivity and access requirements, and site conditions, alongside the status of statutory approvals must also be checked, as unresolved dependencies can affect project feasibility and delay execution.
The development model is also taken into consideration. Leasing an existing office may allow a company to start operations sooner, while a built-to-suit project offers greater scope for customisation but requires more planning. A fit-out presents its own requirements, particularly when the existing building must accommodate specialised technical systems. The right choice depends on the organisation’s operating needs, not simply the speed at which space can be secured.
Technology must inform these decisions from the outset. Network resilience, access control and IT infrastructure need to be incorporated into the design rather than added later. Retrofitting these systems can lead to rework and additional expenditure.
A clear project brief establishes the scope against which costs and timelines can be assessed. It also helps decision-makers understand the constraints before committing capital.
How Project Governance Helps
Once these decisions are finalised, the project moves into execution. At this stage, project governance connects the original brief to the decisions that need to be made on site. It establishes a baseline for the approved scope, budget and schedule, against which actual progress is reviewed. This helps identify deviations early and determine whether they require corrective action or a decision from senior stakeholders.
Design changes, procurement decisions and construction delays can affect project costs or push back the date on which the GCC can begin operations. A defined change-control process helps assess the implications of a proposed change before it is approved. Clear decision-making authority also ensures that issues are addressed by the appropriate stakeholders instead of remaining unresolved between teams.
Monitoring helps establish whether the project is likely to meet its approved budget and schedule. Actual expenditure and committed costs are assessed against the budget, while progress is checked against planned milestones. If costs are projected to exceed the budget or a delay threatens the completion date, the project team needs to identify the cause, assess its impact and determine the corrective action required. Issues that exceed the team’s authority are escalated to the relevant decision-makers before they affect delivery further.
Technology can help improve this process by bringing project information into a common view. Digital project-monitoring platforms can help track site progress and costs, whereas Building Information Modelling (BIM) helps teams identify design clashes before they lead to rework. AI-enabled monitoring may flag deviations earlier, but its usefulness depends on the quality of the underlying data and whether someone is accountable for acting on the findings.
Project governance also extends through commissioning and handover. A completed building is not necessarily ready for occupation. Power systems, digital connectivity and security installations need to be tested against the agreed requirements, and defects need to be resolved before they interfere with operations. Defining acceptance criteria and handover responsibilities early helps prevent these requirements from becoming last-minute obstacles.
The longer-term performance of the asset also needs consideration. Energy efficiency and maintenance requirements influence operating costs after construction ends. Planning for future expansion can reduce the risk of expensive retrofits, provided the additional capacity is justified by the organisation’s needs.
Conclusion
Global Capability Centres (GCCs) have moved beyond handling routine support functions to take on specialised work in areas such as engineering, research and development, artificial intelligence, cybersecurity and digital operations. That makes just securing any office space to start operations an outdated and poor decision. The need of the hour is facilities that support occupiers’ intended business functions, technology infrastructure, power and connectivity needs, security requirements and future capacity. These requirements have to be realised into a project that is technically feasible, financially viable and deliverable within a realistic schedule. Project governance provides the link between this initial business vision and its realisation, ensuring that decisions made at each stage support the successful delivery of a facility that meets the GCC’s requirements.
