Wanting an engineering hub in India but not knowing who to hire, where to place it, or how to get it off the ground — a mechanism to address that concern for Japanese companies through a single point of contact got underway on June 23, 2026. Indian staffing giant Quess Corp announced that it is teaming up with Japan's Institution for a Global Society (IGS) and Indo-Pacific Advisory (IPA) to launch the "Indo-Japan GCC Corridor," which will provide end-to-end support for Japanese companies setting up and scaling GCCs (Global Capability Centers — overseas hubs handling head-office functions) in India. It covers support from building an initial market-entry team to long-term scaling in areas such as AI, engineering, cybersecurity, financial services (BFSI), and DX. For Japanese companies considering entering India, this means a realistic third option beyond "building a base entirely from scratch on your own" has emerged.
The key to this corridor is that it is designed so the three companies cover each other's weaknesses. According to the announcement, Quess Corp will provide the execution capability for talent acquisition and GCC setup within India through its wholly owned subsidiary, Quess International Services Private Limited. IGS will provide access to the Japanese market — that is, serving as the point of contact and bridge with Japanese companies. And IPA will handle coordination with government and the business ecosystem — in other words, local groundwork and institutional support.
If a Japanese company tries to build an engineering hub in India on its own, it has to contract each of these three functions separately and connect the pieces itself. Staffing agencies, entry consultants, local legal counsel — it falls on the company commissioning the work to pull together support that moves independently of each other. What the corridor is aiming for, it seems, is consolidating that coordination burden into a single arrangement. Quess Corp executive Lohit Bhatia offered comments to the effect that "India offers more than just cost efficiency — it's a large-scale gateway to high-quality technology talent" in the announcement. It's a perspective that reframes India not as an outpost for cost cutting but as a source of technical talent.
Behind this is Japan's domestic shortage of IT engineers. The announcement notes that more than 70% of Japanese companies cite demand for cloud, AI, and machine learning (ML) capabilities, and projects that Japan will need as many as 790,000 additional IT and engineering personnel by 2030. The premise that this number cannot realistically be filled domestically alone is the starting point for the corridor concept.
Another tailwind is the deepening economic relationship between Japan and India. Japan has set a policy of investing 5 trillion yen in India by 2027, and in 2025 the two countries updated a bilateral framework aiming for private investment on the scale of 10 trillion yen over the next decade. As national-level investment builds up, IGS's Masahiro Fukuhara positions India's youthfulness — with a population of about 430 million people under 18 — as "a natural strategic complement for Japan." IPA's Nihal Chauhan likewise says that "India is no longer a destination sought merely for scale; it is a partner for innovation," indicating that its role is shifting from subcontractor to co-creation partner. This trend is the Japan-India summit's expansion into Northeast India part of the same continuum, and the current phase is one in which the options for entering India are themselves becoming more layered.
Let's establish, with verifiable numbers, the depth of market the corridor assumes. According to industry surveys, there are already about 85 Japanese-affiliated GCCs in India, employing roughly 180,000 skilled professionals. Projections also point to expansion to 150 sites and 350,000 people by 2028. Bengaluru and Hyderabad are the two leading locations, with more than 60% of surveyed companies naming these two cities as their next growth hubs, followed by Chennai, Pune, Mumbai, and the Delhi NCR.
| Item | Current | Outlook |
|---|---|---|
| Number of Japanese-affiliated GCC sites | About 85 | About 150 by 2028 |
| Number employed | About 180,000 | About 350,000 by 2028 |
| Japan's investment policy toward India | 5 trillion yen by 2027 | 10 trillion yen scale over 10 years (2025 framework) |
| Additional IT and engineering talent needed (Japan) | ― | Up to 790,000 by 2030 |
As reasons for expanding overseas, 72% of surveyed companies cite Japan's domestic labor shortage as the top motivation, followed by high costs at head office and lagging digitalization. What this shows is a shift from an era when cost alone was the goal to a stage where companies are going abroad because they cannot find people at home.
On the day of the announcement, Quess Corp shares briefly rose more than 2%, suggesting the market took a positive view of a staffing company bringing in a new customer segment in Japanese companies. Practitioners involved in supporting entry into India say things like, "Japanese companies are cautious decision-makers with long verification periods before launch, which is exactly why an arrangement that handles everything end-to-end, from the initial pilot team through the design phase, resonates easily." On the other hand, there are also cautious views such as, "Consolidating the point of contact is convenient, but doesn't it risk narrowing the range of hiring by tying you to a specific talent pool?" In fact, major companies such as Sony, Toyota, Hitachi, Nissan, Rakuten, and Dai-ichi Life already have their own operations in Bengaluru and Hyderabad, and which approach a company chooses — corridor-style bundled support or building it themselves — is likely to split along lines of company size and whether they already have in-house knowledge of India.
Before deciding whether to use this corridor, there are points a company should work through internally. First is the priority order of the functions to set up. Even within "AI and engineering," whether you're carving out a piece of development or moving everything from design through operations makes a huge difference in the quality and scale of talent required. Rather than taking the announcement's stated support range of "from pilot team to long-term scale" at face value, a company should first pin down which of its own processes it will place in India.
Second is the exit path for withdrawal or downsizing. Bundled support speeds up setup, but it also increases dependence on the support provider. It's worth confirming at the contract stage what happens to employment contracts, offices, and intellectual property handover if policy changes three years down the line. Third is preparing for talent mobility. As more Japanese-affiliated GCCs concentrate in Bengaluru and Hyderabad, competition for talent intensifies too, so companies should avoid being overly optimistic about retention assumptions. the reverse flow of Indian tech companies acquiring US companies— local talent and technology have grown deep enough that this is happening, so companies need to design compensation on the assumption that top talent has more options than ever.
GCCs are not just for software companies. The areas the corridor covers include not only engineering and BFSI but also healthcare, energy, education, and the small and medium enterprise ecosystem, and the trend of placing part of head-office functions in India is spreading across industries. In manufacturing too, examples of consolidating back-end functions such as design, analysis, and procurement in India are increasing, and moves by Japanese electronic component makers to build a manufacturing base through joint ventures with local companies are becoming a real possibility, as an entry design that combines a talent hub with a production base. Viewing GCCs narrowly as "offshoring the IT department" risks overlooking that this is relevant to your own company too.
When considering setting up a GCC, the starting point is to put your company's purpose for entering (whether cost, talent acquisition, or market development is the main driver) into a single sentence, and then work backward to the location and function that fit it. For concrete examples of entering India and city-by-city trends, please also refer to the related articles below.
The Indo-Japan GCC Corridor has added an entry point beyond "building it entirely from scratch" for Japanese companies wanting a technology hub in India. But having a convenient point of contact doesn't mean you can outsource the entry decision itself. As a next move, it's realistic to work through these three points internally — (1) narrow down in one sentence which functions and processes to place in India, (2) run the numbers with Bengaluru and Hyderabad as the core locations, factoring in talent competition and retention rates, and (3) if using launch support, confirm withdrawal and handover terms before signing the contract — and then compare corridor-style bundled support against building it yourself. Start by measuring results with a small pilot team, and expand in stages if it gains traction. Following this order lets a company join the effort to close the 790,000-person talent gap without overreaching.
RECENT
2026.09.24Bridgestone India’s 30th-anniversary film builds on the founder’s motto2026.09.24Flipkart’s move: putting the two meanings of "BBD" on Kolkata buses2026.09.24Veteran fertilizer maker KICL enters beverages with coconut water, starting in three South Indian states2026.09.24Pinit delivers saris in under 45 minutes, setting up a mirror and lighting at the customer’s home to choose fromCONTACT
Considering entering the Indian market?
Building on the developments on the ground covered in this article, we will suggest an approach that fits your products.
Book a free consultation →SOJAPAN
We support Japanese companies entering India, from market research through local partner development, test sales, and import.