6m remote workers could lose their jobs to offshoring
Discussion
Anything from the Tony Blair Institute should be instantly ignored.
I've worked in Finance for the last 25 years. 15 Years ago we moved roles over to India, 5 years ago we moved them all back.
It may cost 2/3 per head in India, but when you need two people to cover the work it gets expensive. Any strong performer in India gets retained and sponsored to come and work in the UK.
I've worked in Finance for the last 25 years. 15 Years ago we moved roles over to India, 5 years ago we moved them all back.
It may cost 2/3 per head in India, but when you need two people to cover the work it gets expensive. Any strong performer in India gets retained and sponsored to come and work in the UK.
I said at the time, that the zeal with which a lot of people were embracing and espousing the idea they their employer didn't need them "right there" was perhaps not fully thought through. Not against the backdrop of race to the bottom globalised economics. And yes there's a strong evidence that the quality of work can drop markedly when it travels but that's no good after the fact...
Differences between outsourcing versus off-shoring are important.
Outsourcing work means you're getting a supplier to do something for you and there is always a fundamental conflict between the supplier's interests and yours, i.e. you want to pay as little as possible to get as much as possible, and the supplier wants to provide as little as possible and maximise their profit. Outsourcing core activities is almost always stupid. It makes little difference if the supplier is domestic or overseas.
Off-shoring just means having some of your own staff working somewhere else. If you create an ineffective management structure to oversee this, it won't work ... not because the staff are overseas, but because you've got ineffective management.
Out-souring a call centre is something anyone with an inch of brain would try to avoid doing because the call-centre is almost always an absolutely fundamental channel for communicating with your customers. It makes or breaks your customer's image of your firm. Anyone outsourcing that sort of activity just to try to save a few quid almost certainly should be sacked for even suggesting it. Offshoring it is completely different. If you can hire enough people with good language skills, then go for it. If you can't and you create a call centre that doesn't work and undermines the reputation of your organisation, then it's off to the firing squad you go.
Outsourcing work means you're getting a supplier to do something for you and there is always a fundamental conflict between the supplier's interests and yours, i.e. you want to pay as little as possible to get as much as possible, and the supplier wants to provide as little as possible and maximise their profit. Outsourcing core activities is almost always stupid. It makes little difference if the supplier is domestic or overseas.
Off-shoring just means having some of your own staff working somewhere else. If you create an ineffective management structure to oversee this, it won't work ... not because the staff are overseas, but because you've got ineffective management.
Out-souring a call centre is something anyone with an inch of brain would try to avoid doing because the call-centre is almost always an absolutely fundamental channel for communicating with your customers. It makes or breaks your customer's image of your firm. Anyone outsourcing that sort of activity just to try to save a few quid almost certainly should be sacked for even suggesting it. Offshoring it is completely different. If you can hire enough people with good language skills, then go for it. If you can't and you create a call centre that doesn't work and undermines the reputation of your organisation, then it's off to the firing squad you go.
ATG said:
Differences between outsourcing versus off-shoring are important.
Outsourcing work means you're getting a supplier to do something for you and there is always a fundamental conflict between the supplier's interests and yours, i.e. you want to pay as little as possible to get as much as possible, and the supplier wants to provide as little as possible and maximise their profit. Outsourcing core activities is almost always stupid. It makes little difference if the supplier is domestic or overseas.
Off-shoring just means having some of your own staff working somewhere else. If you create an ineffective management structure to oversee this, it won't work ... not because the staff are overseas, but because you've got ineffective management.
Out-souring a call centre is something anyone with an inch of brain would try to avoid doing because the call-centre is almost always an absolutely fundamental channel for communicating with your customers. It makes or breaks your customer's image of your firm. Anyone outsourcing that sort of activity just to try to save a few quid almost certainly should be sacked for even suggesting it. Offshoring it is completely different. If you can hire enough people with good language skills, then go for it. If you can't and you create a call centre that doesn't work and undermines the reputation of your organisation, then it's off to the firing squad you go.
Depending on the situation I would disagree with this.Outsourcing work means you're getting a supplier to do something for you and there is always a fundamental conflict between the supplier's interests and yours, i.e. you want to pay as little as possible to get as much as possible, and the supplier wants to provide as little as possible and maximise their profit. Outsourcing core activities is almost always stupid. It makes little difference if the supplier is domestic or overseas.
Off-shoring just means having some of your own staff working somewhere else. If you create an ineffective management structure to oversee this, it won't work ... not because the staff are overseas, but because you've got ineffective management.
Out-souring a call centre is something anyone with an inch of brain would try to avoid doing because the call-centre is almost always an absolutely fundamental channel for communicating with your customers. It makes or breaks your customer's image of your firm. Anyone outsourcing that sort of activity just to try to save a few quid almost certainly should be sacked for even suggesting it. Offshoring it is completely different. If you can hire enough people with good language skills, then go for it. If you can't and you create a call centre that doesn't work and undermines the reputation of your organisation, then it's off to the firing squad you go.
Some years ago I worked for one of the global IT Outsourcing companies, which included supplying call centres.
Where it works well;
Global setup that allowed resource sharing in times of unexpected peak (we could switch calls anywhere in the world instantly).
Resource sharing within a site - economies of scale
Follow the sun operation.
We supplied call centre services to some very large organisations, including Investment Banks.
Where it didn't make much sense was if a customer insisted on a ring fenced operation, they couldn't gain benefits of scale.
No reason using an outsourced call centre would damage a companies reputation, in many instances the staff in the outsourced call centre have a wider range of experience (technical issues) based on a number of different scenarios the in-house team wouldn't experience.
What experience do you have that supports your view ?
ATG said:
Particularly in financial services there a huge number of foreign companies operating in the UK ... i.e. they've already chosen to employ people outside their domicile and they've chosen the UK. The customers that are being serviced from the UK are also non-UK / global businesses. A huge number of these jobs were already "do anywhere jobs" and were already being done "anywhere so long as it is in an office".
The UK was already competing in a global jobs market and was already doing pretty well. Little changes internationally because of covid.
The changes are more likely to be domestic. Do you have to go to a city centre to do your job? Particularly, do you need to be in the South East in shooting distance of London? WFH => no, you don't.
Will this be disruptive? Yes. Is it a good thing? Yes. It represents a big productivity boost to the economy as a whole because it allows a lot of time to be freed up from unproductive activity (e.g. commuting) and allows us to avoid spending a lot of money on unproductive stuff, e.g. expensive office space that we don't need, transport services that we don't need, expensive plastic-wrapped lunches, etc., etc
People can spend their time and money more productively. God knows, we've been desperately looking for a UK productivity boost. Well here's a great opportunity.
And it's good socially because it can break down the North-South and rural/city economic and social divides.
The UK versus overseas jobs story isn't about covid and working from home. It's about erecting barriers that discourage people from creating jobs in the UK ... i.e. it's Brexit.
How can productivity be boosted without in-person collaboration?The UK was already competing in a global jobs market and was already doing pretty well. Little changes internationally because of covid.
The changes are more likely to be domestic. Do you have to go to a city centre to do your job? Particularly, do you need to be in the South East in shooting distance of London? WFH => no, you don't.
Will this be disruptive? Yes. Is it a good thing? Yes. It represents a big productivity boost to the economy as a whole because it allows a lot of time to be freed up from unproductive activity (e.g. commuting) and allows us to avoid spending a lot of money on unproductive stuff, e.g. expensive office space that we don't need, transport services that we don't need, expensive plastic-wrapped lunches, etc., etc
People can spend their time and money more productively. God knows, we've been desperately looking for a UK productivity boost. Well here's a great opportunity.
And it's good socially because it can break down the North-South and rural/city economic and social divides.
The UK versus overseas jobs story isn't about covid and working from home. It's about erecting barriers that discourage people from creating jobs in the UK ... i.e. it's Brexit.
And those expensive plastic-wrapped lunches you mention, they provide income for part of the economy and employ hundreds of thousands (in the UK).
In my experience offshoring is only really good for basic admin tasks like creating letter from templates. I worked for a company that had an office in India, and whilst they were eager and polite it would fall apart if any outside the box thinking was needed. There was also the communication barrier even though they spoke English, I remember one complaint where a woman rang in and said she'd lost her husband yesterday, to which the advisor replied "well I hope you find him again".
A Winner Is You said:
In my experience offshoring is only really good for basic admin tasks like creating letter from templates. I worked for a company that had an office in India, and whilst they were eager and polite it would fall apart if any outside the box thinking was needed. There was also the communication barrier even though they spoke English, I remember one complaint where a woman rang in and said she'd lost her husband yesterday, to which the advisor replied "well I hope you find him again".
I was about to post something like that, as a customer ringing through an enquiry or an order being met with a barely discernible English accent is infuriating and off putting. Not blaming those doing their best. I believe many Companies have recognised this issue and relocated back in the U.K. Countdown said:
TameRacingDriver said:
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/remote-worki...
I called this out over a year ago as a real threat and the majority of people seemed to dismiss this concern as negativity. Well let's see, because as I've already begun to witness, this process has already started. Seems inevitable to me given most companies only care about money and not people.
On the plus side it does mean that UK graduates can apply for jobs elsewhere in the World. One of my son's mates has been offered a job working for Hewlett Packard based in Barcelona (he's based in Manchester)I called this out over a year ago as a real threat and the majority of people seemed to dismiss this concern as negativity. Well let's see, because as I've already begun to witness, this process has already started. Seems inevitable to me given most companies only care about money and not people.
oyster said:
How can productivity be boosted without in-person collaboration?
And those expensive plastic-wrapped lunches you mention, they provide income for part of the economy and employ hundreds of thousands (in the UK).
Why does there have to be in-person collaboration. Despite what some people think the vast majority of people do not need to collaborate with others most of the time.And those expensive plastic-wrapped lunches you mention, they provide income for part of the economy and employ hundreds of thousands (in the UK).
As for plastic-wrapped lunches, what value do they add to the world? That money saved will be spent on other things, which hopefully will be more value adding to our society than slightly suspicious sandwiches and a pack of crisps from a van or vending machine.
I had a half Indian team and they were lovely people but it did bring some downsides.
One chap spoke perfect English, only it was incomprehensible, he didn't really fully understand me and I don't know if its a cultural thing that they don't feel like they can ask you to clarify but when you ask "Ok, do you understand" they tended to nod and then it became clear later they hadnt understood.
They were always off ill or due to some other disaster, including, but not limited to Monsoons, a politician being murdered, dog attack, kids with fevers, sick parents, sick themselves, flood, electricity failing, heat etc. Another one was for the lady on my team, her driver not turning up as for her safety we included transport as they tended to work UK hours the streets were not safe.
One of them resigned without warning, despite having had a review a month earlier saying how great things were, he had been tempted by a higher salary, had been interviewed, offered and accepted as he didnt feel he was being paid what he was worth, I suggested that mentioning his salary issue to me in the first instance may well have meant we could have done something, but like that, he was off after months of getting him onboarded, trained and up to speed.
Then we all got made redundant and they handed it over to IBM in India and it was a bit of a clusterf
k, seems there are savings that can be made but getting rid of hundreds of combined years of experience and knowledge cant be replaced by someone recruited in a hurry who had some certifications that turned out in a couple of cases to be bogus anyway.
One chap spoke perfect English, only it was incomprehensible, he didn't really fully understand me and I don't know if its a cultural thing that they don't feel like they can ask you to clarify but when you ask "Ok, do you understand" they tended to nod and then it became clear later they hadnt understood.
They were always off ill or due to some other disaster, including, but not limited to Monsoons, a politician being murdered, dog attack, kids with fevers, sick parents, sick themselves, flood, electricity failing, heat etc. Another one was for the lady on my team, her driver not turning up as for her safety we included transport as they tended to work UK hours the streets were not safe.
One of them resigned without warning, despite having had a review a month earlier saying how great things were, he had been tempted by a higher salary, had been interviewed, offered and accepted as he didnt feel he was being paid what he was worth, I suggested that mentioning his salary issue to me in the first instance may well have meant we could have done something, but like that, he was off after months of getting him onboarded, trained and up to speed.
Then we all got made redundant and they handed it over to IBM in India and it was a bit of a clusterf
k, seems there are savings that can be made but getting rid of hundreds of combined years of experience and knowledge cant be replaced by someone recruited in a hurry who had some certifications that turned out in a couple of cases to be bogus anyway.Russ T Bolt said:
ATG said:
Differences between outsourcing versus off-shoring are important.
Outsourcing work means you're getting a supplier to do something for you and there is always a fundamental conflict between the supplier's interests and yours, i.e. you want to pay as little as possible to get as much as possible, and the supplier wants to provide as little as possible and maximise their profit. Outsourcing core activities is almost always stupid. It makes little difference if the supplier is domestic or overseas.
Off-shoring just means having some of your own staff working somewhere else. If you create an ineffective management structure to oversee this, it won't work ... not because the staff are overseas, but because you've got ineffective management.
Out-souring a call centre is something anyone with an inch of brain would try to avoid doing because the call-centre is almost always an absolutely fundamental channel for communicating with your customers. It makes or breaks your customer's image of your firm. Anyone outsourcing that sort of activity just to try to save a few quid almost certainly should be sacked for even suggesting it. Offshoring it is completely different. If you can hire enough people with good language skills, then go for it. If you can't and you create a call centre that doesn't work and undermines the reputation of your organisation, then it's off to the firing squad you go.
Depending on the situation I would disagree with this.Outsourcing work means you're getting a supplier to do something for you and there is always a fundamental conflict between the supplier's interests and yours, i.e. you want to pay as little as possible to get as much as possible, and the supplier wants to provide as little as possible and maximise their profit. Outsourcing core activities is almost always stupid. It makes little difference if the supplier is domestic or overseas.
Off-shoring just means having some of your own staff working somewhere else. If you create an ineffective management structure to oversee this, it won't work ... not because the staff are overseas, but because you've got ineffective management.
Out-souring a call centre is something anyone with an inch of brain would try to avoid doing because the call-centre is almost always an absolutely fundamental channel for communicating with your customers. It makes or breaks your customer's image of your firm. Anyone outsourcing that sort of activity just to try to save a few quid almost certainly should be sacked for even suggesting it. Offshoring it is completely different. If you can hire enough people with good language skills, then go for it. If you can't and you create a call centre that doesn't work and undermines the reputation of your organisation, then it's off to the firing squad you go.
Some years ago I worked for one of the global IT Outsourcing companies, which included supplying call centres.
Where it works well;
Global setup that allowed resource sharing in times of unexpected peak (we could switch calls anywhere in the world instantly).
Resource sharing within a site - economies of scale
Follow the sun operation.
We supplied call centre services to some very large organisations, including Investment Banks.
Where it didn't make much sense was if a customer insisted on a ring fenced operation, they couldn't gain benefits of scale.
No reason using an outsourced call centre would damage a companies reputation, in many instances the staff in the outsourced call centre have a wider range of experience (technical issues) based on a number of different scenarios the in-house team wouldn't experience.
What experience do you have that supports your view ?
Electro1980 said:
oyster said:
How can productivity be boosted without in-person collaboration?
And those expensive plastic-wrapped lunches you mention, they provide income for part of the economy and employ hundreds of thousands (in the UK).
Why does there have to be in-person collaboration. Despite what some people think the vast majority of people do not need to collaborate with others most of the time.And those expensive plastic-wrapped lunches you mention, they provide income for part of the economy and employ hundreds of thousands (in the UK).
As for plastic-wrapped lunches, what value do they add to the world? That money saved will be spent on other things, which hopefully will be more value adding to our society than slightly suspicious sandwiches and a pack of crisps from a van or vending machine.
I know wages are calculated on a demand basis, but by widening the net of potential employees there is reduced demand and therefore reduced wages.
ATG said:
Differences between outsourcing versus off-shoring are important.
There is a more common hybrid in IT where you get offshore bums on seats from a supplier such as Accenture to augment your own teams.Large businesses have wanted to do more of that for years, but quality, ROI, regulatory stuff, timezones holds them back. I don’t see India benefitting massively from this, I think they’ve squeezed everything they can there.
What I do see happening is more hiring outside of the expensive areas of the UK and maybe looking more at Eastern or Southern Europe. If the employees aren’t working in your office I think it would be madness to pay premium rates based on location.
I myself was hiring last year and receiving CVS for £700 a day London contractors and £350 guys based in Manchester and Glasgow. The London guys barely got a look in
Electro1980 said:
oyster said:
How can productivity be boosted without in-person collaboration?
And those expensive plastic-wrapped lunches you mention, they provide income for part of the economy and employ hundreds of thousands (in the UK).
Why does there have to be in-person collaboration. Despite what some people think the vast majority of people do not need to collaborate with others most of the time.And those expensive plastic-wrapped lunches you mention, they provide income for part of the economy and employ hundreds of thousands (in the UK).
As for plastic-wrapped lunches, what value do they add to the world? That money saved will be spent on other things, which hopefully will be more value adding to our society than slightly suspicious sandwiches and a pack of crisps from a van or vending machine.
The best way for the UK to counteract any of this in the short to medium term is to roll out FTTP for all much more quickly. High quality, low latency video links are worth a lot.
But as above, offshoring is fraught with difficulties. A UK staff member remote working from Cornwall or Scotland, even France, people are realising is achievable, but many have the wounds from trying to offshore whole teams to India or eastern Europe.
And it goes both ways. I know a few people in software development who've started working for US companies in the last year or two.
But as above, offshoring is fraught with difficulties. A UK staff member remote working from Cornwall or Scotland, even France, people are realising is achievable, but many have the wounds from trying to offshore whole teams to India or eastern Europe.
And it goes both ways. I know a few people in software development who've started working for US companies in the last year or two.
768 said:
The best way for the UK to counteract any of this in the short to medium term is to roll out FTTP for all much more quickly. High quality, low latency video links are worth a lot.
But as above, offshoring is fraught with difficulties. A UK staff member remote working from Cornwall or Scotland, even France, people are realising is achievable, but many have the wounds from trying to offshore whole teams to India or eastern Europe.
And it goes both ways. I know a few people in software development who've started working for US companies in the last year or two.
Exactly, it cuts both ways. I've worked predominantly for Americans for the last 18 months and have mixed in some euro work. I know loads of people in the same situation. I'm approached about euro and Swiss contracts which are now fully remote instead of requiring travel. These are 1-2 year full remote contracts not just temporary measures. UK workers delivering remotely are now very attractive in offshore markets. Lets hope its the beginning of something.But as above, offshoring is fraught with difficulties. A UK staff member remote working from Cornwall or Scotland, even France, people are realising is achievable, but many have the wounds from trying to offshore whole teams to India or eastern Europe.
And it goes both ways. I know a few people in software development who've started working for US companies in the last year or two.
768 said:
And it goes both ways. I know a few people in software development who've started working for US companies in the last year or two.
And that’s probably an example of them outsourcing to a lower cost locations. Americans are paid much higher than us in tech, especially FAANG.Weak pound must make UK hires quite attractive.
Company I work for used to attract a fair few USA based contractors, I think we have just one now. There was a period where GBP dived something like 35% peak to trough in the space of 3 years, and most disappeared. Likewise, we lost staff to USA firms.
In some ways the company is much more insular and doubled down, meaning given up on offshoring to a large degree. We still hire worldwide, but currently a GCSE in English is required, even technical jobs, which guarantees a certain cultural 'fit'. Which I believe is one buzz word for legalised discrimination?
Company I work for used to attract a fair few USA based contractors, I think we have just one now. There was a period where GBP dived something like 35% peak to trough in the space of 3 years, and most disappeared. Likewise, we lost staff to USA firms.
In some ways the company is much more insular and doubled down, meaning given up on offshoring to a large degree. We still hire worldwide, but currently a GCSE in English is required, even technical jobs, which guarantees a certain cultural 'fit'. Which I believe is one buzz word for legalised discrimination?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff