U.S. workers found to outperform offshore staffers

[Newsjock]

Source: Computerworld

U.S.-based workers show more initiative and are more innovative and more understanding of the business than offshore workers, according to a new study that examines sourcing services in the U.S.

These qualities are helping to boost use of domestic IT services, especially as companies move to cloud-based IT systems, said HfS Research, a business and IT services consultancy.

Domestic workers also work harder than their offshore counterparts, but not by much, according to the HfS survey of 235 "enterprise buyers" (the term HfS used to describe corporate executives who make or influence their companies' business operations and outsourcing decisions) and 270 executives from providers of outsourcing services who invest in locations around the world.

... In most areas associated with productivity, survey respondents reported that U.S.-based staffers exceeded offshore staff by wide margins. For example, asked if "cultural and communication skills" were attributes of U.S. and offshore staffers, 82% of the enterprise buyers agreed or strongly agreed that the term applied to U.S.-based staff, while just 33% said it applied to offshore staff.

Read more: http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9241275/U.S._workers_found_to_outperform_offshore_staffers

[PoliticAverse]

1. Offshoring is about cost not better workers. n/t

[progressoid]

9. Yup.

Lower wages. Lower cost supplies. Lower quality. Less oversight.

More profit for the 1%.

[Nay]

26. Beat me to it. It's about sucking more money out of the corpse, not providing

decent services. Barely passable services provided by cheap, desperate workers are best.

[matthews]

2. Now don't all those people who called (or insinuated) American's were

lazy slackers feel foolish?

Probably not.

[ChromeFoundry]

18. If they are not 'Lazy Slackers'... then they must be...

...'Pompous' - they are over qualified and will seek employment elsewhere in a few months.
or
...'Greedy' - they want a salary that allows them to buy groceries.
or
...'Insubordinate' - they question corporate motives based on ethics.
or
...'Defiant' - they somewhat understand constitutional law.
or
...'Unmanageable' - they cannot be forced to work overtime by having the corporation threaten to void their sponsorship.
or
...'Disobedient' - they don't like being abused in the workplace and have the right to bear arms.
or
...'Hubris' - they won't agree to live in a small apartment with 12 other employees.
or
...'Individualistic' - well, you get the point.

No, THEY don't ever feel foolish about making extra money. Their profits are worth so much more than something as paltry as ethics.

[matthews]

21. You've pretty much nailed down all the other 'justifications' we've

been hearing all these years as to why we need so much imported talent (H-1b visas) OR why we have to ship the work overseas.

Thank you.

[on point]

3. They provide better value, but are not cheaper to myopic business mis-managers

[Scuba]

4. In response, Republican leaders called for closing more schools.

[denverbill]

5. Sure why not? The kids can be taught online by a virtual teacher in India.

[aggiesal]

11. When I was growing up . . .

government subsidized over 80% of a students' education.
Now they subsidize less then 20%. That's why you're seeing
more student loans. My student loan after getting my degree
was a bit over $700.

Meantime, India has started subsidizing their education to
about 80%.

[hollysmom]

6. Like I haven't been saying this for years

When I managed projects for Mellon,I had my hands on all the statistics - Indian workers billed 1/3 of what was billed for American workers. But it took 8 times longer for the work to get done - they would do it fast at first, but it would have to be done over several times. Part was a lack of communications overseas, part was lack of access, but a lot more was the Indian agency misrepresenting the worker's skills and experience. after befriending some of the Indians (i.e. helpingthem get drivers licenses and such - it is not their fault the company was using them) I found hot that the Indian company would fire workers when they got more experience and asked for a raise or better vacation time.

So I gathers the statistics and took them to a meeting with my boss and the president of our subsidiary - power point and all. after a few minutes into my presentation, I was interrupted and told that it didn't matter that it cost more, the tax breaks they got from the government made the difference. I find that illogical, but then he went on. What tax breaks were they getting? The were "creating new jobs". We had a working system and they decided to rewrite it in India because that officially would be new work and job creation. They ignored that as they rewrote systems, they laid off workers in the US - i.e. a negative job creation in reality, they were lying to the government about it being new work - fraud.
Also, every time the outsourced and it was reported, the stock prices would go up and the president of the division (and the president of the company) did not care about long term results, just about stock results. Employees got discounts for buying stock. Normal working people were paying $40 per share, Middle management like me were paying $30 per share and the upper levels of management were paying $6 per share. You can see where they make their big money. Raising the prices of stocks by using popular buzzwords was more important that actually doing good work and producing a product.

[Dustlawyer]

12. The perversion of "free enterprise." This is why you cannot just throw everything to the

markets to let them decide. There is no such thing as a "free market." Too many are willing to break the law to get an edge on their competition. With starved or co-opted regulatory agencies unable or unwilling to prosecute offenders, companies that don't cheat will not survive. Now, that is the justification you hear when they talk about why they break the law, " everybody else is doing it, so I have to!"

[madrchsod]

7. no shit.....they needed a study for that?

[Igel]

17. It's not a study.

It's a research report by an IT consulting firm whose customers are IT professionals.

Want a copy? You can buy it not for the outrageous per-article rate from a journal but for $2999. Yes, the "." is in the right place.

Think of it as documentation for those among the trees but want to know something about the forest. If you have IT work being done, you want to know that your problems are common. If you're thinking about having IT work being done, you need to know where the problems are. Initiative? American IT folk are better. Cultural/communication issues? Well, duh, of course native speakers of American English and bearers of American culture will have better communication with employers that are culturally American and speak American English as their L1.

In some things the gap isn't that wide. Hard work? 4% difference between Americans and overseas. Not so bad.

So how do you use this? Well, one problem is that the overseas workers need more info. So provide the training, hire better-trained workers, or bring the jobs back--as the report says is happening--for the jobs that need it. For IT grunt work where that shouldn't matter it shouldn't matter.

One of the solutions pointed to was H1-B visas.

[Journeyman]

8. It's one of the reasons my business does as much work as I do for foreign corporations . . .

[Warpy]

10. No news there, we always have.

They just weren't content with driving our wages down, they had to starve us for a while.

Jobs will come back. Decent wages won't, not without help from the government.

[emsimon33]

13. I have gotten to the point where if help, etc. has been off-shored

I choose an alternative where I speak to an American. I would hope that that American is paid a living wage and has health insurance, even if part-time.

I am over off- and in-shoring and will take my dollars elsewhere. Next, I am targeting companies that fail to pay a living wage (although I try to do that now: Costco over Walmart and Target for example) and who provide health insurance even topart-time workers (Trader Joes over Walmart,etc.).

[Skittles]

14. I can absolutely confirm this

as someone who works in IT and have had to work with first onshore oncall folk and then offshore oncall - I can tell you there is NO COMPARISON - in fact, they have actually lowered the standards for offshore folk. I AM NOT SAYING THIS IS AN INTELLIGENCE ISSUE.....it is very much cultural, and tied to the fact that offshore folk have the opportunities we no longer have.....onshore folk tend to stick to their jobs longer and are more experienced. And I think it would be nice if I could take off for lunch during a SEV1 issue but that is strictly reserved for offshore folk.

[bvar22]

15. Yes. But workers in 3rd World Countries will work for Slave Wages.

Guess who wins?

Ross Was Right!

Ross was RIGHT,
but BILL was Smooooooth.

[Skittles]

16. problem is, their incompentence ends up costing big bucks

in some cases VERY BIG BUCKS

[Sunlei]

19. must be why the huge moves to "base" all those foreign visa workers IN the usa.

[kelliekat44]

20. Tell me somethng new! nt

[OhioChick]

22. That's a "no shit" headline n/t

[antigop]

23. K&R. nt

[markiv]

24. smaller, better IT teams always outperform larger incompetant ones

but so many managements are focused on suboptimazing via cost per unit, not quality of unit

[Skittles]

25. what I've noticed is

onshore there was one programmer who sucked for every nine who did not - with offshore it is the exact opposite