|
|||
|
|
|||||
|
Sep. 1, 2003 Issue of CIO Magazine | Offshore Outsourcing Special Report Offshore Outsourcing > The Politics
As a growing number of IT jobs move overseas, some CIOs
and economists prophesy a political storm against offshore outsourcing.
BY CHRISTOPHER KOCH | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Read the Executive Summary of this article Have something to say about this article? Add your comments below.....
![]()
|
|
A CIO at a famous
Fortune 100 manufacturer has a recurring nightmare: As he continues to lay
off American IT workers and move their jobs offshore to places such as
India, never to return, American public opinion suddenly swings violently
against globalization. He and his company are demonized, and Americans
boycott his company's products. "Public perception isn't always accurate,
but it counts for a lot of things," he says, after insisting on anonymity.
"We don't want a situation where the public sees us as a malevolent force
and takes it out on our products." Other CIOs are becoming similarly cautious about publically endorsing offshore outsourcing. Of the dozen CIOs contacted for this article, only two agreed to talk completely on the record. Though all believe that the offshore outsourcing trend will continue, some are privately worrying about carrying out the inevitable in a sick economy and wondering if it isn't happening too quickly. It's not hard to find reasons for CIOs to worry. "Do you want to do business with companies that take away jobs for U.S. citizens by outsourcing work to foreign countries?" asks The Organization for the Rights of American Workers (Toraw), a group of displaced, angry American workers laid off by Connecticut insurance and financial services companies. In June 2002, dozens from Toraw and similar groups from across the country held a two-day demonstration outside the Strategic Outsourcing Conference at the Waldorf Astoria hotel in New York City. The same month, other laid-off workers demonstrated outside an outsourcing conference at the Hynes Convention Center in Boston. Organized labor protests at IT conferences in the United States? Even two years ago the idea would have seemed absurd. But as IT employees see many of their jobs moving overseas in a bad economy, opposition to globalization in the United States, hidden during the good economic times of the '90s, could reemerge more strongly than ever. IT companies—such as Accenture, IBM Global Services, Microsoft and Oracle—and mainstream Fortune 500 companies—such as American Express, Citibank, Bank of America, DaimlerChrysler, General Electric, Procter & Gamble, Prudential and United Technologies—are outsourcing to offshore IT companies or expanding their own development centers out of the country.
Technology jobs are following a path well-trodden by the manufacturing industry, which sent millions of jobs offshore or simply eliminated them in the past 30 years, contributing to a drop in the average wages of low-skill workers. Technology professionals will face the same kind of wage drop, and the work could go offshore much faster than manufacturing did, according to Matthew Slaughter, Dartmouth College's associate professor of business administration. "[IT work] will move faster because it's easier to ship work across phone lines and put consultants on airplanes than it is to ship bulky raw materials across borders and build factories and deal with tariffs and transportation." Indeed, by the end of 2004, research company Gartner estimates, one in 10 IT jobs at U.S. IT companies and one in 20 at non-IT companies will move offshore.
Even if such legislation is passed, many observers expect the offshore trend to continue. And its long-term implications for the U.S. IT industry have some deeply concerned. As the bulk of technology work moves offshore, the deep, experiential knowledge that comes from coding applications and solving technology problems—the soil of technology innovation—could move offshore with it. U.S. IT services companies don't spend much on R&D, but they are still innovative because they build the U.S. technology infrastructure, says Ron Hira, chairman of the R&D policy committee with the U.S. branch of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), a nonprofit research and advocacy group. "The reason [U.S. companies] can innovate without spending much on R&D is that they are learning each time they do an implementation," he says. "You build up that knowledge in those workers, and there's spillover as they move into other sectors, start new software companies or take a permanent job with a client. If we don't have that knowledge base here, we will lose out on that innovation and spillover." TRW Automotive's Drouin wonders where he will find his next rising stars in IT if he isn't growing them internally. "It isn't clear what the new entry-level job in IT will be," he says. "We haven't eliminated all our developer jobs, but a good portion is gone. So where do you look for that superstar who is doing a great job and has a rapport with the customer and understands your business?" Jobs, Homes, Families Inside an Elks Club lodge in an ugly strip mall in Wethersfield, Conn., a group of former IT workers are gathering. They have little in common besides the fact that they're out of work, having recently been laid off by big Connecticut IT employers such as Cigna, GE, ING, Northeastern Utilities and United Technologies. The group at the meeting is a mix of male and female, young and old, though more have gray in their hair than not. The aluminum-gated window that connects to the Veterans of Foreign Wars bar next door slams down, signaling the end of drink sales. Everyone squints with anticipation toward the front of the room, where John Bauman, president and cofounder of Toraw and himself an unemployed IT manager, shouts over the blasting air-conditioning system to bring the meeting to order. "This is about our jobs, our homes, our families," he tells the group. His speech, and that of the other Toraw officials, rambles. Bauman admits that the group hasn't quite found its direction yet. But on one point Bauman and the other leaders of Toraw are clear: While pointing out that their group does not oppose immigrants or immigration, they rip into the H-1B and L-1 visa laws, saying both programs are being abused and have created a rise in illegal immigration.
"Taxes, tariffs and reporting every foreign nonimmigrant worker onsite in Connecticut companies," promptly responds James Pace, Toraw's vice president. A man in the audience fumes that offshore outsourcing has the potential to wipe out the middle class. "Are our legislators aware of this?" he asks. Of the three Connecticut legislators who have sent representatives to the meeting, only one representative speaks: Mark Stephanou, director of constituent services from U.S. Sen. Christopher Dodd's office. He doesn't have anything conclusive to say, either. "We are as concerned about jobs as you are," he offers. (Later, Dodd became a sponsor of a bill in Congress to limit the L-1 and H-1B visas.) Toraw describes itself as a grassroots movement, not a union. But some say that if the outsourcing trend continues, a white-collar labor movement could arise. This time, the structure would be completely different than the traditional blue-collar labor unions (think Internet rather than union hall).
Opponents of offshore outsourcing ignore the large benefits that it brings to the U.S. economy, says Sunil Mehta, vice president of the National Association of Software and Service Companies (Nasscom) in India. Mehta estimates that U.S. companies will save up to $11 billion in 2004 by outsourcing to India and that India will purchase $3 billion in high-tech imports from the United States in that time. "I think it is really a two-way mutually beneficial argument," he says. "If IBM is able to lower its cost structure, the U.S. economy benefits as a whole." Mehta argues that trade protectionism has not helped other American industries such as the steel industry, where employment has declined 80 percent since its peak, he says, nor has it helped steel consuming industries in the United States that were forced to pay high prices for steel. "At the individual U.S. IT employee level, I do not have any answers," he says, "but if you look at it in a total economic perspective, it is mutually beneficial." Gone for Good It's tempting to write off the threats of offshore outsourcing. The economy will improve, IT workers will find new jobs, opposition to offshoring of U.S. jobs will melt, and all will be well. Or offshore outsourcing will never mature to the point where anything but the most basic development work and maintenance will go offshore. That's what some economists like Robert Reich think. According to various analyst company predictions, only about 10 percent to 20 percent of IT jobs will go offshore. Anyone who subscribes to this soothing theory risks getting blindsided. The trend will continue (unless the U.S. government intervenes) because the apparent cost advantages are simply too seductive. According to a May 2003 survey by CIO, 68 percent of the more than 100 IT executives who responded said their offshore contracts will increase this year. Only 30 percent foresaw no change. "The primary benefit to moving IT offshore is cost, and the only thing that's holding it back is building up the capabilities offshore to do the work," says IEEE's Hira. "So unless you could come up with a way that markedly advances U.S. workers productivity so that they could produce a higher-quality product faster than they do today, there is no economic incentive to keep the work here." In other words, this isn't like the old days, when the local factory used to lay off workers during a lean spring and hire them back in the fall when demand picked up again. The IT jobs that are going offshore are going there for good. It's what economists call a structural, as opposed to cyclical, change in the labor market. And if costs in India—the primary center of offshore IT work today—begin to rise, the work will move to other cheap offshore locations, such as China. The trend toward offshore outsourcing has only just begun. Indeed, in the CIO survey, 67 percent of respondents did not begin offshore outsourcing until after 2000. Offshore outsourcing is just beginning to hit the mainstream, with 80 percent of companies saying they will discuss it in 2003, according to Gartner. Until now, offshore outsourcing has been mostly limited to large companies that have big chunks of work to send offshore (the coordination expenses were too high to make small projects cost-effective). But as the offshore outsourcing companies have matured, so have their processes. "Many of our clients are now starting projects with five people," says Peter Harrison, CEO of Induslogic, a global outsourcing company. As more jobs move offshore, the work will move higher on the IT food chain. Indeed, it already has. The CIO survey found that 11 percent of the companies had outsourced system and architecture planning offshore, and 14 percent had outsourced research and development—two categories that analysts and chief information officers have predicted would never leave these shores. "When people say there is IT work that can't be done offshore, I disagree; it just takes longer to move the more complex work offshore," says Atul Vashistha, CEO of Neo-IT, an outsourcing advisory company. The Dilemma for CIOs When low-skilled manufacturing work left these shores beginning in the 1970s, the U.S. economy reabsorbed those workers into other areas of the economy—primarily in the services sector, says Dartmouth's Slaughter. It's this reabsorption effect that leads the majority of economists to believe that global competition is ultimately good for the U.S. economy. Manufacturing companies in the United States are now more productive than they were before they faced international competition. Higher productivity per worker means more corporate profits and higher salaries on average, as long as the workers being displaced can be reabsorbed into the economy somewhere else. Even if workers are reabsorbed, however, it doesn't necessarily mean they will be better off. Low-skilled workers make less in real dollars today than they did in 1973. Now that white-collar jobs are coming under the same global competitive pressure, the same effect on wages may be felt at the managerial level. "In the past, the distributional impacts from global competition were pretty clear," says Slaughter. "The more-skilled guys are going to benefit from more global engagement, and the low-skilled guys aren't. Now it's more of a grab bag." Experts don't see a "white knight" industry that will come along to do for IT workers what the services sector did for displaced manufacturing workers. Other high-skilled fields are also under pressure from international competition—accounting, engineering and architecture are already feeling the same kind of pressure as IT. As competition for skilled service jobs in the United States increases and low-cost options increase offshore, white-collar wages could begin to drop across the board. Economic statistics show that when people change jobs because of global competition, it usually involves a decline in wages, at least initially. Even so, many CIOs see the move offshore as inevitable.
"You have to meet cost challenges or you won't provide shareholder returns," Campbell adds. "We are intertwined with the global economy now, so the question is how to embrace that and move it forward." This is not to say that CIOs don't have ethical qualms about what they see going on inside their departments. The CIO from the previously mentioned Fortune 100 manufacturer sounds as angry as the displaced workers at the Toraw meeting when the discussion turns to temporary work visas. He says Indian contractors consistently abuse the requirement that they first look for a suitable American to fill the job before bringing in an Indian on a visa. "Every now and then one of the big [Indian] companies comes to me and says, 'Before you sign the contract, we need you to sign an affidavit that says you looked for Americans to do the work and you didn't find them,'" he says. "And I say, 'Get out of here. That's a lie. I won't do it.' And they say, 'OK, OK,' and somehow it becomes a nonissue." That CIO feels guilty, but he is insulated from the ethical and legal implications of the visa issue, indeed from the entire transition to offshore—as is his company. Its executives simply are not involved, except to make the decision in the first place. They hire an outsourcing company, and the outsourcing company takes care of all the messy immigration and work transition issues. Nor is there the kind of visible drama to the IT move offshore that there was during the manufacturing transition, when major plant closings made the news. The movement of IT jobs offshore is happening quietly, almost imperceptibly. And if the economy continues in the doldrums, few new jobs will be created to replace them.
If IT employees want to stay employed in this new era, they must be willing to accept lower wages, change jobs more frequently, relocate when necessary and consider going back to school to gain new skills. "I don't have a ready answer for what we do in IT after we send these jobs offshore," says TRW Automotive's Drouin. Even so, he feels he has no choice but to continue with the offshore strategy—it saves his company a great deal of money. However, the Fortune 100 CIO who has that recurring nightmare is worried that it's too easy for companies like his to outsource overseas today. "Look, I can't wake up tomorrow and decide I'm going to move to Italy and get a job," he says. "So why should someone from another country be able to come here on a temporary visa and take jobs from Americans? There are people who say open everything up. That's one world view. Another view is you bring people in to the extent that you can assimilate them, and that they build on the society rather than disrupt the society. "I don't want to wake up one day and find that American IT has disappeared." Do you have opinions about the impact of globalization on the IT workforce? Tell Executive Editor Christopher Koch at ckoch@cio.com. Senior Writer Stephanie Overby and Staff Writer Ben Worthen contributed additional reporting to this story.
PHOTO CREDITS: CHIP FORELLI/GETTY IMAGES/THE IMAGE BANK; JOE DROUIN BY DAVID BADITOI; RON HIRA BY RANDALL SCOTT; JEFF CAMPBELL BY REID HORN | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |
Most recent responses ... "...soon boundaries will exist only on national flags and immigration checks." Not so fast. We still have national governments and arms race. As I have no intention to live under Marxist rule of Chinese, or socialist rule of Indians; and so do Indians and Chinese have no desire to swap their respective governments for US alternative (or so I heard :). Indians do not pay for our social programs, but we do pay for Indian ones - through offshoring. The products developed in India/China/Russia are aimed squarely on US/European markets - i.e. we are paying for all these gadgets and software. Paying US prices, not Indian ones... And as soon as we won't be able to afford these (with $5/hour McJobs?) who's gonna buy it? India? Assuming that India becomes an affluent society (and I wish it would!), there would be no cost advantage to producing these there in the first place; but US infrastructure would be dismantled by that time... I am not againt outsourcing per se, I believe there should be some balance that insures that US corporations benefit US before all other countries (as Indian corporations should benefit India, and Chinese - China). There are so much differences to be resolved before we could become a single global system!
The world is moving towards a Global economy and its hard to ignore that.Like the EU...soon boundaries will exist only on national flags and immigration checks.Indians are freaking out on McD's and i personally would love a Subway combo than any local cuisine!! Customer experience does not depend on where you call up, but who you call up. If somebody is gonna be rude or incomprehensible, it would not matter if that person is in Bombay or Boston.In service with AT&T my experience with every american has been great and to think i can connect now to a better fusion culture. Im in no position to understand how an avg american is affected but i know for sure that things will look bright ahead!
In about 10-15 years the standard of living in India, China and Russia will rise, and the salaries gap will be narrowed to a point where it would make no sense to off-shore anything. Meanwhile, the generation of US IT graduates will be lost, and eventually will be replaced (at considerably lower salaries) by on-shore immigrant workers. High rate of failure in offshore projects will open the CEO eyes; low IT enrolment will bring down the price of education; and when foreign lawyers and doctors will be allowed to practice in US the only save haven remaining will be that of politicians. The very proponents of comparative advantage theory (the one that brough the current situation about) cannot help but notice that this time the competitors are after our comparative advantage - well educated white-collar worker. Though the economic demise of the US might or might not occur, the future definetely does not look promising without massive government intervention. A corporation is state-less; it owes its allegiance to its shareholders only, and is supposed to do what is the best for them. There is no (and should not be) such words as "patriotism" in corporate vocabulary. But this is where the government must step in to balance corporate greed ("Greed is good!") and national interests. Without the first we have no economy, without the latter we would have no country. My advice to the current and future IT workers is to lower their expectations, increase efficiency, update skills, or move to some other field (like, plumbing). Alex Kriegel
Index of all responses to this column to date. Comments are no longer accepted on this article. |
![]() |
|
![]() In the September 1, 2003 Issue of CIO:
CIO Magazine - September 1, 2003 |