Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Why are companies offshoring innovation? The emerging global race for talent

  • Article
  • Published:
Journal of International Business Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper empirically studies determinants of decision by companies to offshore innovation activities. It uses survey data from the international Offshoring Research Network project to estimate the impact of managerial intentionality, past experience, and environmental factors on the probability of offshoring innovation projects. The results show that the emerging shortage of highly skilled science and engineering talent in the US and, more generally, the need to access qualified personnel are important explanatory factors for offshoring innovation decisions. Moreover, contrary to drivers of many other functions, labor arbitrage is less important than other forms of cost savings. The paper concludes with a discussion of the changing dynamics underlying offshoring of innovation activities, suggesting that companies are entering a global race for talent.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Our interpretation of the word “talent” throughout this paper is that of highly qualified individuals with advanced university degrees. Particularly relevant to this study is the concept of technical talent, referring to Master and PhD graduates in Science and Engineering (S&E), and experienced workers.

  2. The H1B is a non-immigrant visa category for temporary (3+3 years) workers in specialty occupations requiring the theoretical and practical application of a body of specialized knowledge if a US citizen or resident is not available. H1B applicants must hold a bachelor's degree or the equivalent in the specific specialty (e.g., engineering, mathematics, physical sciences, computer sciences, medicine and health care, education, biotechnology, business specialties). Each fiscal year, the US Congress sets a cap on H1B admissions. The H1B visa is the main channel for US companies to employ foreign S&E workers in the US.

  3. For a report on policy proposals intended to increase the supply of engineers and scientists in the US, and a discussion of the consequences of a continued shortage of engineering and science talent in the US, see Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future (Committee on Prospering in the Global Economy of the 21st Century, 2005).

  4. The 2004 and 2005 surveys were supported by the Duke CIBER and Archstone Consulting LLC. In 2006 the ORN lead corporate sponsor was Booz Allen Hamilton, the global management consulting firm. As of 2007, The conference Board and PriceWaterhouseCooper are lead collaborators of the ORN Project.

  5. Partner Universities include Copenhagen Business School (covering Scandinavian countries), Wissenschaftliche Hochschule für Unternehmensführung (Germany), RSM Erasmus University (Netherlands), IESE (Spain), Manchester Business School (UK), ULB – Solvay Brussels School of Economics and Management (Belgium), and Bocconi University (Italy).

  6. Alternative measures were tested in the model, including rates of growth and discounting for GDP/pro capita GDP. We chose the operationalization that showed the best performance.

  7. The survey question was: “For each function, please evaluate the importance of the following strategic drivers in your decision to offshore,” to be evaluated on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1= not important at all to 5= very important.

  8. Three correlation coefficients, between Speed and Global, between overall supply of S&E and D2003, and between Cost of labor and Other costs, present high values (respectively 0.43, 0.43, and 0.38) and are statistically significant at 1%. However, when we entered the two variables involved separately, the regression results differed only marginally, indicating these correlations do not affect the regression model.

  9. We tested the models also for pre-2003 and post-2004 subsamples, and obtained very similar results. The correlation tables for the two subperiods are very similar to those of the whole period, and therefore are not reported. Results are available from the authors.

References

  • Amiti, M., & Wei, S.-J. 2005. Fear of service outsourcing: Is it justified? Economic Policy, 20 (42): 308–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Apte, S., McCarthy, J. C., & Furstoss, R. J. 2006. Offshore product development has arrived, Market Overview, Forrester Research, August.

  • Barney, J. B. 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17 (1): 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, C. A., & Ghoshal, S. 1990. Managing innovation in the transnational corporation. In C. A. Bartlett, Y. Doz, & G. Hedlund (Eds), Managing the global firm: 215–255. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belderbos, R. A., & Heijltjes, M. G. 2005. The determinants of expatriate staffing by Japanese multinationals in Asia: Control, learning and vertical business groups. Journal of International Business Studies, 36 (3): 341–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, L. 2006. The thinking man's outsourcing. Inc. Magazine, May.

  • Buckley, P., & Casson, M. 1976. The future of the multinational enterprise. London: Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Buckley, P., & Lessard, D. R. 2005. Regaining the edge for international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 36 (6): 595–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunyaratavej, K., Hahn, E. D., & Doh, J. P. 2007. International offshoring of services: A parity study. Journal of International Management, 13 (1): 7–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butz, W. P., Bloom, G. A., Gross, M. E., Kelly, T. K., Kofner, A., & Rippen, H. E. 2003. Is there a shortage of scientists and engineers? How would we know? Science and Technology Issue Paper, RAND Corporation.

  • Calantone, R. J., & Stanko, M. A. 2007. Drivers of outsourced innovation: An exploratory study. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 24 (3): 230–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell, J. 1991. The international agglomeration of R&D. In M. Casson (Ed.), Global research strategy and international competitiveness: 104–132. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell, J. 1995. The globalisation of technology: What remains of the product cycle model? Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19 (1): 155–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caves, R. E. 1996. Multinational enterprise and economic analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caves, R. E. 1998. Industrial organization and new findings on the turnover and mobility of firms. Journal of Economic Literature, 36 (4): 1947–1982.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chanda, R., & Sreenivasan, N. 2005. India's experience with skilled migration. In C. Kuptsch & E. F. Pang (Eds), Competing for global talent: 215–256. Geneva: ILO International Institute for Labour Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, K. B., & Fujimoto, T. 1991. Product development performance: Strategy, organization, and management in the world auto industry. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coase, R. 1937. The nature of the firm. Econometrica, 4 (16): 386–405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, M. S., & Zaidi, M. A. 2002. Global skill shortages. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Committee on Prospering in the Global Economy of the 21st Century. 2005. Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

  • Cyert, R., & March, J. G. 1963. A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delios, A., & Henisz, W. J. 2003. Policy uncertainity and the sequence of entry by Japanese firms, 1980–1998. Journal of International Business Studies, 34 (3): 227–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. 1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48 (2): 147–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doh, J. P. 2005. Offshore outsourcing: Implications for international business and strategic management theory and practice. Journal of Management Studies, 42 (3): 695–704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dossani, R., & Kenney, M. 2003. Went for costs, stayed for quality? Moving the back office to India, Working Paper, Asia-Pacific Research Center, Stanford University.

  • Dossani, R., & Kenney, M. 2004. Offshoring: Determinants of the location and value of services, Working Paper, Asia Pacific Research Center, Stanford University.

  • Dossani, R., & Kenney, M. 2006. Reflections upon “Sizing the emerging global labor market”. Academy of Management Perspectives, 20 (4): 35–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dossani, R., & Kenney, M. 2007. The next wave of globalization: Relocating service provision to India. World Development, 35 (5): 772–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunning, J. H. 1980. Towards an eclectic theory of international production: Some empirical tests. Journal of International Business Studies, 11 (1): 9–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunning, J. H. 1993. Multinational enterprises and the global economy. Wokingham: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunning, J. H. 1998. Location and the multinational enterprise: A neglected factor? Journal of International Business Studies, 29 (1): 45–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunning, J. H. 2000. Regions, globalization and the knowledge-based economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunning, J. H., & Narula, R. 1995. The R&D activities of foreign firms in the United States. International Studies of Management & Organization, 5 (1–2): 39–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Economist. 2006. The battle for brainpower, Special Report, 5 October.

  • Ernst, D. 2002. Global production networks and the changing geography of innovation systems: Implications for developing countries. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 11 (6): 497–523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ernst, D. 2006. Innovation offshoring: Asia's emerging role in global innovation networks, East–West Center Special Report Number 10. Honolulu: East–West Center.

  • Farrell, D., Laboissiere, M. A., & Rosenfeld, J. 2006. Sizing the emerging global labor market: Rational behavior from both companies and countries can help it work more efficiently. Academy of Management Perspectives, 20 (4): 23–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feinberg, S. E., & Gupta, A. L. 2004. Knowledge spillovers and the assignment of R&D responsibilities to foreign subsidiaries. Strategic Management Journal, 25 (8–9): 823–845.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flier, B., Van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. 2003. Co-evolution in the strategic renewal behaviour of British, Dutch and French financial incumbents: Interaction of environmental selection, institutional effects and managerial intentionality. Journal of Management Studies, 40 (8): 2163–2187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Florida, R. 1997. The globalization of R&D: Results of a survey of foreign-affiliated R&D laboratories in the USA. Research Policy, 26 (1): 85–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Florida, R. 2005. The flight of the creative class: The new global competition for talent. New York: Harper Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. B. 2005. Does globalization of the scientific/engineering workforce threaten US economic leadership? Working Paper No. 11457, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.

  • Friedman, T. L. 2005. The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granstrand, O., Håkanson, L., & Sjölander, S. 1992. Technology management and international business: Internationalization of R&D and technology. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R. M. 1996. Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17 (Winter Special Issue): 109–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Håkanson, L. 1990. International decentralization of R&D: The organizational challenges. In C. A. Bartlett, Y. Doz, & G. Hedlund (Eds), Managing the global firm: 256–278. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Håkanson, L., & Nobel, R. 1993. Foreign research and development in Swedish multinationals. Research Policy, 22 (5–6): 373–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, R. H., Wheelwright, S. C., & Clark, K. B. 1988. Dynamic manufacturing: Creating the learning organization. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henley, J. 2006. Outsourcing the provision of software and IT-enabled services to India: Emerging stratergies. International Studies of Management and Organization, 36 (4): 111–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschman, A. O. 1970. Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirshfeld, S., & Schmid, G. 2005. Globalisation of R&D. TEKES Technology Review, 184. Finland: Tekes, http://www.tekes.fi/eng/publications/julkaisuarkisto.asp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoetker, G. 2007. The use of logit and probit models in strategic management research: Critical issues. Strategic Management Journal, 28 (4): 331–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horst, T. 1972. Firm and industry determinants of the decision to invest abroad: An empirical study. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 54 (3): 258–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howells, J. 1990. The location and organisation of research and development: New horizons. Research Policy, 19 (2): 133–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howells, J. 1995. Going global: The use of ICT networks in research and development. Research Policy, 24 (2): 169–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutzschenreuter, T., Pedersen, T., & Volberda, H. 2007. The role of path dependency and managerial intentionality: A perspective on international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 38 (7): 1055–1068.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hymer, S. 1976. The international operations of national firms. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenney, M., & Florida, R. 1994. The organization and geography of Japanese R&D: Results from a survey of Japanese electronics and biotechnology firms. Research Policy, 23 (3): 305–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan, H., & Islam, M. S. 2006. Outsourcing, migration, and brain drain in the global economy: Issues and evidence, Working Paper 004/2006, U21Global.

  • Khanna, T., & Palepu, K. G. 2004. Globalization and convergence in corporate governance: Evidence from Infosys and the Indian software industry. Journal of International Business Studies, 35 (6): 484–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kshetri, N. 2007. Institutional factors affecting offshore business process and information technology outsourcing. Journal of International Management, 13 (1): 38–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuemmerle, W. 1999a. The drivers of foreign direct investment into research and development: An empirical investigation. Journal of International Business Studies, 30 (1): 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuemmerle, W. 1999b. Foreign direct investment in industrial research in the pharmaceutical and electronics industries: Results from a survey of multinational firms. Research Policy, 28 (2–3): 179–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lall, S. 1979. The international allocation of research activity by US multinationals. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 41 (4): 313–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J. 1986. Determinants of offshore production in developing countries. Journal of Development Economics, 20 (1): 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin Institute. 2005. The evolving global talent pool: Issues, challenges and strategic implications. New York: The Levin Institute.

  • Levy, D. L. 2005. Offshoring in the new global political economy. Journal of Management Studies, 42 (3): 685–693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, A. Y., & Couto, V. 2007. Next generation offshoring: The globalization of innovation, Durham, NC: Duke University CIBER/Booz Allen Hamilton Report.

  • Lewin, A. Y., & Peeters, C. 2006a. Offshoring work: Business hype or the onset of fundamental transformation? Long Range Planning, 39 (3): 221–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, A. Y., & Peeters, C. 2006b. The top-line allure of offshoring. Harvard Business Review, 84 (3): 22–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, A. Y., & Volberda, H. W. 1999. Prolegomena on coevolution: A framework for research on strategy and new organizational forms. Organization Science, 10 (5): 519–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, A. Y., Long, C. P., & Carroll, T. N. 1999. The coevolution of new organizational forms. Organization Science, 10 (5): 535–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lieberthal, K., & Lieberthal, G. 2003. The great transition. Harvard Business Review, 81 (10): 70–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manning, S., Lewin, A. Y., & Massini, S. 2008. The globalization of innovation: A dynamic perspective on offshoring. Academy of Management Perspectives, 22 (3): 35–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, E. 1984. R&D and innovation: Some empirical findings. In Z. Griliches (Ed.), R&D, patents and productivity: 127–154. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. 1958. Organizations. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maskell, P., Pedersen, T., Petersen, B., & Dick-Nielsen, J. 2007. Learning paths to offshore outsourcing: From cost reduction to knowledge seeking. Industry & Innovation, 14 (3): 239–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mehta, A., Armenakis, A., Mehta, N., & Irani, F. 2006. Challenges and opportunities of business process outsourcing in India. Journal of Labor Research, 27 (3): 323–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murmann, P. J. 2000. Knowledge and competitive advantage: The coevolution of firms, technology, and national institutions. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray, J. Y., & Kotabe, M. 1999. Sourcing strategies of US service companies: A modified transaction-cost analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 20 (9): 791–809.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murtha, T. P. 1991. Surviving industrial targeting: State credibility and public policy contingencies in multinational subcontracting. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 7 (1): 117–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murtha, T. P. 1993. Credible enticements: Can host governments tailor multinational firms’ organizations to suit national objectives? Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 20 (2): 171–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murtha, T. P. 2004. The metanational firm in context: Competition in knowledge-driven industries. Advances in International Management, 16: 101–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murtha, T. P., & Lenway, S. A. 1994. Country capabilities and the strategic state: How national political institutions affect multinational corporations’ strategies. Strategic Management Journal, 15 (Summer Special Issue): 113–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murtha, T. P., Lenway, S. A., & Hart, J. A. 2001. Managing new industry creation: Global knowledge formation and entrepreneurship in high technology. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Board. 2004. Science and engineering indicators 2004, Vol. 1. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.

  • Nelson, R. R. 1991. Why do firms differ, and how does it matter? Strategic Management Journal, 12 (Winter Special Issue): 61–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. 1982. An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. 1995. The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, C. 1991. Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16 (1): 145–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patel, P., & Pavitt, K. 1991. Large firms in the production of the world's technology: An important case of “non-globalisation”. Journal of International Business Studies, 22 (1): 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, R. D. 1999. Decentralized R&D and strategic competitiveness: Globalized approaches to generation and use of technology in multinational enterprises. Research Policy, 28 (2–3): 157–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedersen, T., & Jensen, P. D. O. 2007. Offshoring of advanced activities, Paper presented at European Academy of Management (EURAM) Annual Conference Current Management Thinking: Drawing from Social Sciences and Humanities to Address Contemporary Challenges? Paris, 16–19 May, Paris. Brussels, Belgium: EURAM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pisano, G. P. 1990. The R&D boundaries of the firm: An empirical analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35 (1): 153–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. 1985. Competitive advantage. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quélin, B., & Duhamel, F. 2003. Bringing together strategic outsourcing and corporate strategy: Outsourcing motives and risks. European Management Journal, 21 (5): 647–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, J. B. 2000. Outsourcing innovation: The new engine of growth. Sloan Management Review, 41 (4): 13–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rangan, U. S., & Schumacher, P. 2006. Entrepreneurial globalization: Lessons from the experiences of European small and medium enterprises, Paper presented at IIM-B Management Review Conference on Global Competitiveness Through Outsourcing: Implications for Services and Manufacturing, Bangalore, 13–15 July.

  • Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. 2004. A perspective on regional and global strategies of multinational enterprises. Journal of International Business Studies, 35 (1): 3–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sako, M. 2002. Modularity and outsourcing: The nature of co-evolution of product architecture and organisation architecture in the global automotive industry, Working Paper, Templeton College, University of Oxford.

  • Takeishi, A. 2002. Knowledge partitioning in the interfirm division of labor: The case of automotive product development. Organization Science, 13 (3): 321–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thursby, J., & Thursby, M. 2006. Here or there? A survey of factors in multinational R&D location, Report to the Government–Industry Research Roundtable. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

  • Vernon, R. 1966. International investment and international trade in the product cycle. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 80 (2): 190–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Volberda, H. W., & Lewin, A. Y. 2003. Co-evolutionary dynamics within and between firms: From evolution to co-evolution. Journal of Management Studies, 40 (8): 2111–2136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Hippel, E. 1988. The sources of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wernerfelt, B. 1984. A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5 (2): 171–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wesson, T. 1993. An alternative motivation for foreign direct investment, Unpublished Dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.

  • Williamson, O. E. 1975. Markets and hierarchies: Analysis and antitrust implications. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Witt, M., & Lewin, A. Y. 2007. Outward foreign direct investment as escape response to home country institutional constraints. Journal of International Business Studies, 38 (4): 579–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zweig, D. 2005. Learning to compete: China's efforts to encourage a “reverse brain drain”. In C. Kuptsch & E. F. Pang (Eds), Competing for global talent: 187–214. Geneva: ILO International Institute for Labour Studies.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Fuqua School of Business, Duke University, Durham, USA

    Arie Y Lewin

  2. Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK

    Silvia Massini

  3. Solvay Brussels School of Economics and Management, Brussels, Belgium

    Carine Peeters

Authors
  1. Arie Y Lewin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Silvia Massini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Carine Peeters
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Accepted by Martin Kenney and Silvia Massini, Guest Editors, 6 August 2008. This paper has been with the authors for three revisions.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lewin, A., Massini, S. & Peeters, C. Why are companies offshoring innovation? The emerging global race for talent. J Int Bus Stud 40, 901–925 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2008.92

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2008.92

Keywords

Search

Navigation