This research aims to assess the risks and benefits of outsourcing for organisations, sectors and nations. The literature on outsourcing contains little evidence of…
This research aims to assess the risks and benefits of outsourcing for organisations, sectors and nations. The literature on outsourcing contains little evidence of research on holistic issues of its impact at systems levels beyond the firm, notably sectors and nations.
A Delphi study with senior strategists from private and public sectors captured perspectives and specific observations on benefits and risks of outsourcing. Emergent issues on outsourcing policy, strategy and decision‐making processes were synthesised into a framework for analysing factors associated with outsourcing.
The findings suggest that a more holistic view of outsourcing is needed, linking local, organisational issues with sector and national level actions and outcomes. In this way, aggregate risks and benefits can be assessed at different systems levels.
Future research might address the motivations for outsourcing; currently there is little research evidence to assess whether outsourcing is a mechanism for failing to solve internal problems, and moving responsibility and risk out of the firm. Additionally most outsourcing research to date has concentrated on an activity either being “in” or “out”; there is little research exploring the circumstances in which mixed models might be appropriate.
The framework provides an aid to research and an aide memoire for managers considering outsourcing.
This paper contributes to knowledge on understanding of outsourcing at different systems levels, particularly highlighting the implications of outsourcing for sectors and nations. Previously most research has focused at the level of the firm or dyadic relationship.
Gender diversity and equality vary tremendously among countries. This is a particular challenge for foreign subsidiaries, when the level of gender diversity and equality…
Gender diversity and equality vary tremendously among countries. This is a particular challenge for foreign subsidiaries, when the level of gender diversity and equality differs between the home and host country. Various indicators such as a low-gender pay gap or a high ratio of females in managerial positions suggest that Scandinavia is ahead in terms of gender diversity and equality, whereas those indicators suggest that the level in Japan is currently lower. The purpose of this paper is to investigate how executives leading Scandinavian subsidiaries operating in Japan perceive this situation, and whether and what kind of actions they take to initiate change.
This study is based on a qualitative analysis of 20 in-depth interviews with executives of Scandinavian subsidiaries in Japan.
Findings reveal that executives of Scandinavian subsidiaries respond to the major differences in gender equality between Scandinavia and Japan with three strategies of change: resistance and rigid change, compromise and moderate change, and adaptation and maintaining status quo. Moreover, the findings indicate that the strategy of change varies depending on individual differences of the executives, e.g., nationality, and organizational differences, e.g., subsidiary size.
Due to the small sample size, the generalizability of the findings is limited. Given the paucity of research on this topic, this approach provides first insights for building a basis for future studies.
This study contributes to the scarce literature on gender diversity and equality in multinational enterprises by identifying strategies of how gender equality can be fostered in a non-Western context from a top executive perspective.