Search results

The article discusses offshoring as an irreversible trend that is redefining the paradigm of global competition of service firms, and provides insight and practical advice regarding the offshore behavior of service firms for management professionals.

The offshoring process is applied to service firms including lessons learned. It is largely based on the results of a research study among 247 service firms determining their offshore behavior and illustrated with examples of their offshoring activities.

Offshoring is redefining global competition and service firms should use it as a tool to create a competitive advantage vis‐à‐vis their competitors. In doing so they should careful prepare offshoring in different phases of the process as suggested in the 4M approach. Moreover, they should decide in an early stage on monitoring, reporting and measuring the offshoring process and secure continuous commitment from management.

The offshoring process referred to in this article as the 4M approach should be further tested among service firms.

Providing insight and practical advice regarding the offshore behavior of service firms for management professionals.

Research in the past has been largely focused on manufacturing firms. This article focuses on service firms and is based on findings of primary research executed by the authors.

Offshoring, the process of relocating discrete business functions or processes to foreign locations, is rapidly expanding. Offshoring integrally links real estate decisions to business strategy, offering corporate real estate (CRE) professionals an opportunity to advise and perform at the highest levels of their organisations. Fulfilling this degree of strategic leadership requires knowledge of the issues, opportunities, challenges and tactics involved in the offshoring process. This paper analyses the views and experience of CRE executives involved in offshoring, and prepares the reader to think strategically, act proactively and employ best practices to achieve future success with offshoring.

This study aims to examine the effect of exploratory innovation offshoring on the level of hierarchical control and how this effect is moderated by transnational and dynamic environments.

This study draws on a sample of 148 Taiwanese multinational enterprises to examine their governance decisions on foreign investments.

Findings show that the more innovation offshoring is exploratory, the higher the level of hierarchical control will be used by multinational enterprises (MNEs) and that transnational and dynamic environments have different moderation effects on the positive exploratory innovation offshoring-hierarchical control relationship.

This study has two theoretical implications. First, this study extends the concept of complexity from a transaction attribute level (problem) to an environmental level (transnational environment) and finds that exploratory innovation offshoring and transnational environments interactively impact governance choices. Second, this study distinguishes between two sources of technological uncertainty – uncertainty due to transaction-level attributes (exploratory innovation offshoring) and external environments (dynamic environments) and finds that exploratory innovation offshoring and dynamic environments interactively impact governance choices.

The practical implication of this study lies in the simultaneous consideration of exploratory innovation offshoring and transnational/dynamic environments, which will allow international decision-makers to adjust/select the governance forms most appropriate for speedy responding to and handling environmental changes.

This study employs the theoretical perspectives of transaction cost economics (TCE) and resource-based view (RBV) to analyze and discuss the impact of operational environments – transnational and dynamic environments – on MNEs’ decisions on the governance structure for a given innovation offshoring.

The advantages of offshoring are increasingly under scrutiny, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has advanced the debate, calling for a redefinition of firms' production location strategies. While attention has primarily focused on the relocation of second-degree strategies, such as back-shoring, near-shoring and further offshoring, there are also other alternatives, including home country-based domestic product and process innovations, and the development of new business activities. The objective of the authors' paper is to identify which factors influence decision-makers when they select and implement such post-offshoring strategic alternatives.

The authors consider 11 Italian manufacturing companies that implemented these strategies and analyze triggers, drivers, enabling factors and barriers of the decision phase, as well as content, governance mode and timing of the implementation phase.

Based on the collected findings, the authors suggest a set of propositions for further research. First of all, firms can simultaneously manage multiple strategies by adopting an ambidextrous approach through which to mitigate supply chain risks. They may integrate their domestic and international production activities, but the home country remains central for innovations and production of high-end products and Industry 4.0 technologies increases the probability of investing in their home country. At the same time, lack of competence induces selective near- and back-shoring, while full back-shoring is mainly a consequence of managerial mistakes. Competence availability acts as a barrier to relocation in the home country, inducing the implementation of either an insourcing strategy or a combination of insourcing and outsourcing.

The authors' work identifies post-offshoring as a dynamic process and provides insights into the post-pandemic scenario. The conceptual framework may represent a useful tool for company managers in re-evaluating their initial offshoring strategies.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the offshoring-employment relationship under globalization in Korean manufacturing for the period from 1998 to 2010 using industry-level panel data and Generalized Method of Moments.

For the first time in the literature the type of trade specialization is taken into account, distinguishing manufacturing between export-specialized and import-specialized industries.

There is evidence that materials and services offshoring have a significantly negative effect on employment in export-specialized industries. In contrast, there is a non-significant association in import-specialized industries.

These results may cast new light on the offshoring-employment relationship.

Major contribution of this paper is that it sheds new light on the effect of offshoring on employment by distinguishing export-specialized industries from import-specialized industries.

This paper aims to offer a long-term systematic picture of the evolution of manufacturing offshoring (in terms of intensity, geography and drivers) highlighting the changes in the surrounding context and the resulting transitions points (“points in time”) that have shaped its development path.

Three statistical tools were adopted on a dataset of 644 cases. First, the authors resorted to multiple structural change tests to identify the transition points. Second, the authors explored offshoring geography by conducting a network analysis. Finally, the authors adopted gravity models to shed light on offshoring drivers.

Results highlight three offshoring phases: expansion (2002–2006), reconsideration (2007–2009) and rationalization (2010 onwards). During the first phase, characterized by economic growth, firms were mainly interested in economic savings; offshoring to low-cost countries was the prevailing location strategy. Subsequently, during the economic crisis, the number of cases declined and the main drivers became market-based factors together with the research for cost savings. Finally, in the third phase, when the economy was still stagnating and new manufacturing technologies appeared, the number of offshoring cases has further decreased, and technological- and market-based factors have become the main location drivers.

The study is the first to adopt a systematic, empirical and quantitative approach to analyze the evolution of the manufacturing offshoring considering both the phenomenon itself and the triggering changes in the surrounding context. In doing this, the authors also tested the importance of considering the point in time in offshoring strategies.

Offshoring has been studied widely in the literature on strategic management and international business. However, apart from its consideration as an administrative activity, scant attention has been paid to the offshoring of the human resource (HR) function. Research in this regard has instead focussed on outsourcing (Reichel and Lazarova, 2013). The purpose of this paper is to achieve a better understanding of companies’ decisions to offshore HR activities. It adapts the outsourcing model of Baron and Kreps (1999) by including the HR offshoring phenomenon and a dynamic perspective.

While the analysis is mostly conceptual, the authors ground the author’s arguments in offshoring data from the Offshoring Research Network, to explore whether the drivers for offshoring HR differ from the drivers for offshoring other administrative activities. The idiosyncrasy of the HR function is supported by the authors’ exploratory analysis and also by the descriptive case of a multinational and its experience with offshoring.

A coevolutionary model is proposed for understanding the behaviour of companies offshoring their HR activities. This study contends that companies should address their decision to offshore HR activities from a dynamic perspective, being aware of three processes that are in constant change: the evolution of the HR function, the evolution of service providers, and the evolution of offshoring decisions.

This study seeks to make a threefold contribution to the international business, strategy, and HR management disciplines.

An indiscreet strategy of offshoring from low-cost countries (LCCs) can do more harm than good, since invisible supply chain risks may increase hidden costs and subsequently more than offset cost-saving opportunities. Considering the potential impact of these risks on offshoring, the purpose of this paper is to identify risk factors that significantly hinder the efficiency of offshoring and then measure specific risks associated with offshoring in foreign countries.

This paper develops performance metrics for gauging the offshoring attractiveness of potential sourcing countries using data envelopment analysis and then identifies the benchmark sourcing country using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP).

This study reveals that, defying the conventional wisdom, LCCs are not necessarily the most desirable offshoring destinations. This study also discovers that LCCs tend to be less business friendly, less logistically efficient, and riskier to source than their high-income country counterparts.

This paper is one of the first to introduce the concept of wealth creation efficiency for an offshoring decision and consider a host of key determinants such as wealth creation efficiency, logistics efficiency, business friendliness, and various supply chain risks for selecting the most desirable offshoring destination.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how three key dimensions of a firm’s offshoring portfolio – location diversity, functional diversity and governance mode – affect the financial and innovation outcomes of offshoring.

The authors investigate the relationships between the diversity of a firm’s offshoring portfolio and its offshoring outcomes using a sample of US, European and Asia Pacific firms engaging in offshoring activities.

The authors found that: location diversity shows a significant “flipped S-shape” relationship with innovation outcomes, but has a negative impact on financial outcomes, functional diversity has a significant and positive effect on innovation outcome and the use of an outsourcing governance mode significantly moderates these relationships, such that the degree of offshore outsourcing weakens some of these effects.

The authors conclude that firms which strategically coordinate all three dimensions of their offshoring portfolio are more likely to achieve better innovation or financial outcomes from their use of offshoring in global supply chain and sourcing.

This paper aims to focus on production offshoring and “backshoring” in a representative sample of 151 New Zealand manufacturers. It identifies how and why firms offshore; why many increase their offshoring while others “backshore”; and why most firms continue to compete internationally without offshoring.

Data collection used a two-wave postal questionnaire survey of 676 firms, with a usable response rate of 22.3 per cent and no indication of non-response bias.

Most exporters manufactured only from their New Zealand base, but 44 per cent had outsourced some production offshore in the period 2001 to 2011. Among the 67 offshored firms, 11 had then “backshored” to New Zealand. The main reasons for offshoring were lower labour costs and capacity constraints in New Zealand. “Backshoring” occurs when lower labour costs become offset by impaired capabilities in flexibility/delivery; quality; and the value of the Made in New Zealand brand especially among consumer goods producers. Stay at home firms reported fears of lowered quality; country loyalty; and their Made in New Zealand country of origin brand.

Offshoring begins tentatively but many firms then increase their offshoring to reap the benefit of lower labour costs. These reasons for “backshoring” mirror those given for keeping production in New Zealand and must be given careful consideration by firms considering offshoring.

There are few studies of offshoring by smaller manufacturers and none that have elucidated this as a process, one that is still avoided by many and can end in costly “backshoring” for others.