MYCPE ONE

Compare Engagement Models for building your offshore teams 

DIY

MOS

DOS

BOT

DIY, Managed Offshoring (MOS), Dedicated Offshoring (DOS), and Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT), side-by-side so you can choose what fits your business best. 

Comparison Metrix

Each engagement model, DIY, MOS, DOS, and BOT, offers a different balance of cost, speed, control, and workspace flexibility.

This table gives you a clear, side-by-side view so you can quickly compare the
key features and decide which approach fits your business goals best. 

Feature DIY MOS DOS BOT
MOS uses ready infrastructure, no upfront spend. DOS gives you a branded dedicated office with signage, also no Capex (only infra fees). DIY demands heavy upfront setup. BOT requires phased Capex during transfer.
Access to large vetted talent pool and geo-diverse offices. DIY scaling is slower. BOT scales quickly initially, then client-managed.
MOS and DOS include pre-built SOPs, HR systems, admin support. DIY builds from scratch. BOT transitions responsibilities over time.
All models provide full decision-making on team structure, appraisals, and culture.
MOS/DOS under our compliance umbrella. DIY requires full legal setup. BOT starts under us, then transitions to client.
MOS/DOS shield clients under our EOR structure. DIY exposes to risks. BOT offers partial protection during setup.
Not applicable in MOS/DOS. DIY requires TP compliance. BOT requires TP post-transfer.
MOS/DOS/BOT use proven playbooks. DIY lacks maturity.
MOS/DOS/BOT offer transparent models. DIY costs are less predictable.
MOS/DOS/BOT are system-driven. DIY is people-dependent.
All models allow full-scale hiring, though DIY may struggle in niche roles.
MOS/DOS/BOT recruit from Tier 1–3 cities. DIY usually limited to one location.
MOS/DOS/BOT attract seasoned professionals. DIY lacks pull.
MOS/DOS/BOT have structured training. DIY lacks systems.
Integrated in MOS/DOS/BOT. Not available in DIY.
MOS/DOS/BOT allow centralized or distributed setups. DIY mostly centralized.
MOS/DOS/BOT offer tax-optimized structures. DIY uses traditional models.
MOS/DOS/BOT enable fast replacements and continuity. DIY struggles.
MOS/DOS/BOT provide extended services like CPE, M&A, marketing. DIY must manage independently.
MOS/DOS/BOT provide compliant contracts. DIY drafts its own with risks.
MOS/DOS/BOT can evolve into GCCs. DIY is limited.
MOS/DOS/BOT leverage geo-distribution for lower costs. DIY costs are inflated.
MOS/DOS/BOT follow structured multi-stage vetting. DIY hiring is informal.
MOS/DOS/BOT support visa documentation. DIY lacks experience.
MOS/DOS/BOT use unified platforms. DIY is fragmented.
DOS provides dedicated branded space. MOS/BOT provide managed shared/customized options. DIY must handle independently.
DOS provides a dedicated space with your signage, customized to your theme. MOS offers shared space. DIY requires Capex-heavy setup. BOT provides shared setups until transfer.
BOT supports state-level incentives. DIY manages on its own. MOS/DOS not directly applicable.
MOS/DOS keep MYCPE ONE as EOR. DIY makes client EOR from day one. BOT transitions over time.
MOS/DOS/BOT provide end-to-end support. DIY faces multiple challenges.