International offshoring of services: A parity study

Conventional wisdom suggests that firms engage in international offshoring of services primarily to reduce wage costs associated with a given service activity. Drawing on international business research on the costs of doing business abroad (CODBA), liability of foreignness (LOF), and institutional theory, we investigate the factors that contribute to the location choices for services offshoring activity, including wage differentials between the home and host countries. We find that consistent with a parity perspective but contrary to conventional expectations, a country is more likely to be a destination of services offshoring as the average wage of a country increases. We also find that education level and cultural similarity are significant drivers of offshoring location choices, again consistent with a parity perspective. This study contributes to debates about the economic impact of services offshoring by showing that firms locate offshoring facilities in destinations that are closer in wages to the home country and those with higher education levels and cultural similarity.

[1]  B. Ohlin,et al.  Inter-Regional and International Trade. , 1935 .

[2]  R. Vernon.  International investment and international trade in the product cycle , 1966 .

[3]  M. Kotabe,et al.  Global sourcing strategy and sustainable competitive advantage , 2003, Industrial Marketing Management.

[4]  Diana Farrell.  Offshoring: Value Creation Through Economic Change , 2005 .

[5]  L. Dosier,et al.  Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings , 1997 .

[6]  Srilata Zaheer.  The liability of foreignness, redux: a commentary , 2002 .

[7]  Z. Govindarajulu,et al.  A modification of the test of Shapiro and Wilk for normality , 1997 .

[8]  K. Sauvant.  World Investment Report , 1999 .

[9]  Robert E. Hoskisson,et al.  Strategy in Emerging Economies , 2000 .

[10]  D. Sethi,et al.  Liability of foreignness to competitive advantage: How multinational enterprises cope with the international business environment , 2002 .

[11]  D. North.  Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance: Economic performance , 1990 .

[12]  M. Porter.  The Competitive Advantage Of Nations , 1990 .

[13]  G. Hofstede.  Culture′s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations Across Nations , 2001 .

[14]  Susan M. Mudambi,et al.  The Outsourcing of It-Enabled Business Processes: A Conceptual Model of the Location Decision , 2005 .

[15]  Srilata Zaheer.  Overcoming the Liability of Foreignness , 1995 .

[16]  B. Ohlin,et al.  The International Allocation of Economic Activity , 1977 .

[17]  T. Kostova,et al.  Adoption of an Organizational Practice by Subsidiaries of Multinational Corporations: Institutional and Relational Effects , 2002 .

[18]  M. Nyaw,et al.  Mitigating liabilities of foreignness : defensive versus offensive approaches , 2002 .

[19]  R. Mudambi,et al.  Political Tradition, Political Risk and Foreign Direct Investment in Italy , 2003 .

[20]  R. Mudambi.  The MNE investment location decision: Some empirical evidence , 1995 .

[21]  Srilata Zaheer,et al.  THE DYNAMICS OF THE LIABILITY OF FOREIGNNESS: A GLOBAL STUDY OF SURVIVAL IN FINANCIAL SERVICES , 1997 .

[22]  Peter W. Roberts,et al.  Integrating Transaction Cost and Institutional Theories: Toward a Constrained-Efficiency Framework for Understanding Organizational Design Adoption , 1997 .

[23]  J. Johanson,et al.  The Mechanism of Internationalisation , 1990 .

[24]  J. Pearce,et al.  Revising Our Understanding and Expectations of the International Trade in Services , 2004 .

[25]  J. Doh.  Offshore Outsourcing: Implications for International Business and Strategic Management Theory and Practice , 2005 .

[26]  M. Casson,et al.  The future of the multinational enterprise , 1977 .

[27]  Stewart R. Miller,et al.  DISTANCE MATTERS : LIABILITY OF FOREIGNESS , INSTITUTIONAL DISTANCE AND OWNERSHIP STRATEGY , 2004 .