GCC Location Feasibility Assessment Tool

Bangalore has a mature ecosystem and global presence but comes with higher costs and higher attrition. Hyderabad offers modern infrastructure, lower attrition, and strong government support, making it cost-effective. Many enterprises today consider Hyderabad a competitive alternative while still benefiting from India’s deep technology talent pool.

Mexico is emerging as a nearshore GCC destination with cultural alignment and time-zone advantages for U.S. companies. However, India remains ahead in terms of scale, specialized digital talent, and cost efficiency. Many firms adopt a dual strategy, Mexico for regional operations and India as the primary global hub.

Poland provides high-quality engineers and proximity to European markets, but salaries are significantly higher compared to India. India’s cost advantage and vast talent supply make it more attractive for large GCC setups, while Poland is often chosen for niche roles requiring European languages or regional market expertise.

Hyderabad and Pune are strong options for balancing technology talent with lower attrition rates. Tier-2 cities like Coimbatore also show promise for stability and retention. Bangalore and Gurgaon still offer the deepest talent pools, but high attrition and competitive hiring often challenge long-term sustainability in those locations.

The UAE has excellent infrastructure, pro-business policies, and is growing as a strategic GCC hub. However, its talent pool and cost structures differ from India. India remains more feasible for large-scale operations, while the UAE works well for niche, leadership-oriented centers focused on regional innovation and strategy.

Tier-2 cities such as Coimbatore, Vizag, and Kochi are becoming attractive due to lower costs, strong retention, and expanding talent ecosystems. While they may not match Tier-1 cities in scale, they provide resilience and sustainability. Many enterprises are adopting hybrid models that mix Tier-1 scalability with Tier-2 stability.