outsourcing in the developing

8/4/2019 Outsourcing in the Developing

1/10

Outsourcing In The DevelopingAnd Developed World

By Huck Gutman

26 March, 2004The Statesman, IndiaWe begin with a law ofinternational relations: No actioninvolvingtwo countries hasequal effects oneach.Thisis certainly true ofthenew economic interdependence of India and the USA. Forin additionto a newcloseness betweenthegovernments ofthesetwo great democraciesin recent years includingsharedconcerns aboutterrorism, thenuclear capacity of Pakistan, thepossibility China will dominate all of Asia there are also significantemergenteconomic linkages betweenthem. These linkages may yetproveto bethe mostimportanteventintheir recent bilateral relationship.Thenew economic interdependence ofthetwo nationsisthe result oftheintersection ofseveral modernphenomena. Oneisthe movementtoward globalization. Anotheristhe operatingprinciple of modern

corporations, inparticular MNCs, that fiscal efficiency is absolutely necessary for corporatesuccess. (Itshould benoted that corporate success, as used here, refersto thegrowth ofprofits.) A third isthestrategy, originally broughtto its highest level ofpracticein Japan as a mode ofproductiveefficiency, ofoutsourcing.Outsourcing refersto work done by people otherthan a corporations full-timeemployees;the outsourcingwe will referto henceforward isthatin which a corporation divestsitself ofthoseelementsintheprocess ofproduction which bringin modest or littleprofitinterms ofthe capital invested. These less-profitable orperipheral activities can beperformed, supposedly moreefficiently, by other, usually smaller, corporations,which gainefficiency by concentrating onthe activity itself, honingtheproductiveprocessso thatit cancreatenew efficiencies, makingprofits which the larger corporation would not be attentiveenough togenerate.Forexample, a large automobile manufacturer might wantto purchase headlights, orspeedometers, ratherthanproducethem. That way, it could pay attentionto assembling and merchandising automobiles, andcould leavetheprocess of designing and producingthe headlightto a supplier. Asthe Japaneserediscovered, outsourcing meansthe headlight can beprovided forthesame (or often lower) price by asupplier asthe car manufacturer, with itsinefficiencies ofscale, canprovideit. With less capital investment,sinceno capital is required from the auto manufacturerto producethe headlights, aseach carissold thereturn oninvested capital which ifthe company is well managed should remain relatively constant rises.n other words, if you invest fewer dollars (or yen, or rupees) foreach item sold, and theprofit oneach itemstaysthesame, you get back a greaterpercentage return on yourinvestment. Still simpler: lessinvested,higherprofits.Thatisthetheory, and Japanese manufacturers madeit work. They concentrated on core business;theyoutsourced, reducingtheirneed for capital;they developed a just-in-timestrategy for ordering, cuttingthe

cost of maintaininginventory, thereby passing onthe cost of maintaininginventory. Inventory, after all, ismerely product justsittingthere, thephysical embodiment ofinvested capital, and earnsno return asitsitswaitingto be used.Thepotency ofthe Japanese model, which wasso economically successful inthe 1980s, wasnot lost onEuropean and US corporations. Overthe course of a decade, US corporations downsized, outsourcing lessprofitable aspects oftheirproduction, creatinggreater administrativeefficienciesintheprocess. At first, theyfollowed the Japanese model: outsource withinthe domestic economy.


2/10

Theintersection of liberalized tradepolicies, theneed forefficiency inproduction as a motor forincreasingprofits, and thestrategy of outsourcing, created a global movement of jobs. Oncethe decisionthatoutsourcingto reduce costs and improve return oninvestmentis made, thereispowerful impetus for majorcorporationsto move jobs around theglobe. If laboris less costly in onenationthanin another, it makeseconomic senseto produce labor-intensiveproducts wherethe labor costis lower. When outsourcingnvolvessending labor-requiring work, whetherin manufacture ofservices, to another country, itis known asoffshoring.nthe USA, forinstance, many hundreds ofthousands of jobs were offshored to Mexico afterthesigning ofthe North American Free Trade Agreementin 1993. Manufacturersinthe USA were accustomed to paying$15-25 an hour, with health care and retirement benefits, to US workers. NAFTA enabled them to hireMexican workersinthe Maquiladora zone the mile-widestrip of Mexico just acrossthe US border to dothesame jobs for a dollar or a dollar and a half an hour, without benefits.With the 1994 US acceptance ofthe General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (now subsumed into theWorld Trade Organization), a new aspect of outsourcingemerged. Since a workerin Mexico would do for adollar an hour what a workerinthe USA did for $25 an hour, corporations laid off millions of US workers andsenttheir jobsto Mexico. Butthenittranspired that Mexican labor at $1 an hour was a lot moreexpensivethan laborin China, whereproduction workers work for of a fifth or a quarter ofthe Mexican wage. The

Maquiladora zone, built from almostnothinginto a majoreconomic enginein Mexico, beganto lose jobs bythetens and hundreds ofthousands.Theemergence of China as a majoreconomic poweris almost completely dependent uponthisphenomenon of outsourcing, as well asproducing finished products for resale by multinationals, in a worldof freetrade.Whilethepundits of capitalism speak ofthe huge market comprised by Chinas 1.2 billionpeople as aneconomic territory in which foreignproducers areeagerto sell, thereis a reasonthat Chinese consumershave disposableincome: a great deal of money has beengenerated in China by the outsourcingthere ofmanufacturing forthe MNCs. Itis worth recallingthatitisnotthe low wage Chinese workers who havedisposableincome. Hugenumbers of Chinese workers are laboring atstarvation wages: often locked infactoriesto keepthem working long hours at difficulttasks, they are disproportionately female (being more

easily bullied into followingthe orders of management, being morepatient at doingtheendless routinetasks ofproduction) and are amongthe lowestpaid laborers onearth. Inthe Chinesegovernments desireto keep wages competitively low, itencourages corporationsto moveever fartherinland where wages areeven lower.n 1817, British economist David Ricardo propounded a principlethat hesaid governed capitalistproduction. Thenatural price of laboristhatprice which isnecessary to enablethe laborersto subsist andto perpetuatetheir race, withouteitherincrease or diminution. Whenthenumber of laborersisincreased,wages again fall to theirnatural price, and indeed from a reactionsometimes fall below it. Ricardos Lawwastruethen, and istruenow: unlessthereis a scarcity of labor, wagestend to drop lower and lower, tillthey reach a point wherethey equal the minimum amount required to keep a worker alive. On annternational scale, which is clearly in operationtoday, Ricardos Law isthe dynamic behind thephenomenon known as the raceto the bottom. Everywhere, MNCsseek lower and lower wages. If Mexico

pays morethan China, send the jobsto China. If China beginsto pay morethan Vietnam, send the jobstoVietnam. And pay the Vietnamese worker only whatis required for him or herto havesufficientstrength toshow up atthe factory gatetomorrow.The only way to counteract Ricardos Law within a domestic economy that has more workersthan jobsiswhen workers organize labor unions, and usetheir collectivestrength to provide a counter forceto the raceto the bottom intheirplace of work. (Strong labor unionsin middlethird ofthe 20th century isthe reason USmanufacturing jobspaid as well asthey did, $20-25 an hour.) The only way to counteract Ricardos Law in aglobal economy wherethere are more workersthan jobs, is by puttingprotectionsinplace, nationally andnternationally, which recognizethe right of laborto organize unions, and which establish fair laborpractices


3/10

to abetthe rights of workersinevery country.Here aresome remarkablestatistics. Inthepastthree years, the USA has lost 2.7 million jobs, sometoautomation and productiveefficiency, but many to job flightto low-wage China. Inthatnumber were 15 percent ofthe USAs manufacturing jobs 15 per cent!But for a variety of reasonsthe hemorrhaging of jobs wasnot ofimmediatepublic concerninthe USA.Those reasons are worth listing. First, of course, there are huge financial benefitsto the owning class whooutsource jobs. The owning class, the USAs wealthiest citizens, along with the large corporations, pourhuge amounts of money into fundingpolitical campaigns, with the resultthat mostelected officialspay moreattentionto undergirdingthe corporate drive forprofitthanto theneeds of ordinary US workers. Alongsimilar lines, the US media chooseto focus onsmall scandals, individual acts ofviolence, and gossip, sincethe handful ofgiant corporations which ownthe media haveno interest, literally no interest, in bringingcorporate downsizing and offshoringto the attention ofthepublic.Additionally, the majority ofthe job loss has beenin manufacturing, in what are called blue collar jobs. Butnthe USA union membership, once concentrated inthe manufacturingindustries, has beenin decline formany years. Because of declining workersolidarity, when jobsin manufacturing disappear, thereis lesspublic outcry atthe closing ofeconomic horizonsthan one mightexpect. And Americans have been, up until

recently, and not withoutsome justification, gripped by a new great American dream. The USA has alwaysprided itself on being a land of upward mobility. Since World War II, and ever morestrongly intheensuingdecades, that dream hasnot only been ofgreater financial rewards foreach generation, but also ofmovement from blue collar jobsto white collar jobs from workersto professionals, from the assembly lineto the officesuite. Thus, if manufacturing jobs are lost, it may notnecessarily seem ofgreat consequence:Americans believetheir children will be ableto get better jobs, jobsin offices, jobsinthenew knowledgeand information based economy. Forthat world oftechnology and informationis, Americans have beentold,theeconomy ofthe future.The first huge job losses werein labor-intensive low-pay work such astextiles and makingshoes. Thetextile and clothingindustry is, interms ofemployment, a behemoth of manufacture. It wastextilemanufacture and processing, morethan anythingelse, that created the modernproletariat: low-pay jobs,ong hours, men and women workingto the unceasing demands of machines. Although industrial

manufacture helped create a huge middle classin Europe and the USA, it wasnevertextile manufacturewhich did this. Those who madethe cloth, sewed the clothes, stayed poor. So one could arguethat makingclothingin low wage countries was just another chapter ofthe continuing history ofthe firstgreatsectorintheindustrial revolution. Movement upward has always beenthe dream ofthe working class:into betterobs, better work. Thus, losing jobsinthetextile and clothingindustries could beseen as relatively benign:there were always jobs making cars, in construction, ingovernmentservice, which paid better and offeredmore opportunities.Even whenthe job losses werein high-paid manufacturing, there was a sensethatgoods could beproduced elsewhere, becausethevital sectorsintheeconomy werenotin makingthings, butin mentalwork. Deciding how things wereto be manufactured, moving and sortinginformation, developingnewknowledge: Americansthought, not without justice, thattheemergenteconomy ofthe late 20th and 21stcentury would demand computerprogrammers, accountants, scientists, architects. All of whom would be

well paid, and work atsatisfying jobs.White collar jobs werethe future ofthe USA, and US workers. Buttoday theres a new phenomenonthathas appeared intheglobal marketplace. Thesame forces globalization., fiscal efficiency, and outsourcing thattransformed manufacturing havenow reshaped thenature of white collar jobs. Job flight from theUSA (and Europe) has begunintheprofessional services. In consequence, whereas five years ago themajorthreatto US workers wasseento be China, today the majorthreat appears as India. India.The movement of white-collar jobs inservice, ininformationtechnology, inprofessional expertise has


4/10

created a new relation between India and the USA. For whilethe massive job lossto China, mostly in low-skill manufacturing, has had major consequence for both nations, it hasnot created as much politicaltensioninthe USA asthe loss ofprofessional service jobsto India. Whatis happeningintheinteraction ofthe Indian and US economiesseems one ofthe mostpublicized issuesin US politicstoday;indeed, itisnotbeyond possibility thatit will emerge as one ofthe central issuesintheelection forthcomingnext November,when Americans will choose a president and the large majority ofthe federal legislature.n looking at whatthe outsourcing of white-collar jobsto India means, itis hard to see anything but cause for

optimism abouttheeconomy ofthesubcontinent despite certain dangersposed by the MNCs raceto thebottom, writes HUCK GUTMANFor a good number of years, India hasinvested heavily ineducation, in whateconomists call humannfrastructure. There are, atthepresent moment, largenumbers of Indianengineers, architects, computerprogrammers, scientists, mathematicians and students of management. Thus, India has major resourcesinntellectual capital;noristhis an accident, sinceits a direct result of decisions made regardingsupport foreducationingeneral and highereducationinparticular.Additionally, India is also a nation whose advanced trainingis donein English. No one wantsto apologiseforthe historical reality that led to theprimacy of English: Britainsimperial hegemony overthesubcontinentnthe 19th and 20th centuriespropelled English as a national language and madeittheprimary the

anguage of university instruction. Today, the worlds businessis donein English. English istheprimaryanguage ofthe worldseconomic superpower, the USA.There are, after all, highly trained engineersin China, brilliant computerprogrammersin Russia. But add tondias huge cadre oftrained professionals, with theirimmense driveto succeed and their deeppridein

doing work well, the advantage ofthorough conversance with and in English, and you have a recipe for intodaysglobal economy job creation.Theimportance of English can clearly beseeninthe firstinflux of US jobsto India. These were lower-levelservice jobs:some were low-payinginthe USA, like answering calls from those who havequestions about,say, a billing for a credit card transaction, whilesome were moderately professional jobs, at highersalaries,asinprovidingtechnical services overthetelephone. Clearly, English is required forthesetelephone callcentre jobs, so India, with its highly trained and completely fluent English-speaking work force, isthesite ofchoice forthe relocation of US call centres.But US and European corporations werequick to understand thatif labour-costsavings wereto be had byansweringtelephonesin Mumbai or Bangaloreinstead of New York or San Francisco or London, evengreatersavings could be had by making use oftheinternet. If an architect works on a projectinPhiladelphia, forinstance, the highly-skilled and laboriousprocess of making drawings and establishingspecifications forevery aspect oftheproject can be done by a trained architect orengineerin Chennai for asmall fraction ofthe costthatsuch architectural support work would costinthe USA.The USAs Fluor Corp, forexample, accordingto Business Week, employs 1,200 engineers and draftsmennthe Philippines, Poland and India to turn layouts ofgiantindustrial facilitiesinto detailed specs andblueprints. For a multibillion-dollarpetrochemical plant Fluoris designingin Saudi Arabia, a job requiring50,000 separate constructionplans, 200 young Filipino engineersearning lessthan $3,000 a yearcollaboratein real time with elite US and British engineers making upto $90,000 via Web portals.And thereisno reason, none at all, why a skilled financial analystin Mumbai cannot do investment researchas well as onein New York at a fifth ofthe cost.Accordingto figures from the International Labour Organisation and the Paaras Group, while a softwareengineerinthe USA makes an average of $66,100 a year, in India she or he makes $10,00 a year.

Mechanical engineers: $55,600, India $5,900. IT managers: $55,000, India $8,500. Accountants: $410,00,ndia $5,000.

According a CNN report, Bangalore aloneis hometo 1,00,000 high tech workers, many ofthem employedby US companies. Across all of India, one millionpeople work for US based companies, like GE Capital andMicrosoft. Itisestimated thateight billion dollarsinservices areexported from India to the USA each year.The future will see more ofthesame.tisnot justthe USA thatis offshoringprofessional employment. A recentstudy by the McKinsey & Co.estimated thatin 2002 MNCs moved nearly $35 billionin white-collar job spending offshore. Yet moresignificant, itestimated thatthe offshoring ofsuch jobs would grow by an astonishing 30 and 40 per cent


5/10


6/10


7/10

would seem to begoing well inthe realm ofthe worldsgreatesteconomic power.Seemisthe operative word. For whilestockssoar and some CEOsearn $100 million a yearinpay, theAmericanpopulaceisincreasingly worried abouttheeconomic future ofthe US workplace. Chief amongtheir worriesisthis: Forrester Research predicts at least 3.3 million white collar jobs and $136 billioninwages will shift from the USA to low-cost countries by 2015.t has been argued thatthe loss of blue collar jobs, which has marked theprevious decade and become averitabletorrent of offshoringinthepastthree years, did notstrike atthe heart ofthe US body politic inthesame way as doesthisnew loss ofservice and information-related jobs. The dream ofeveryoneinthe USAsthatsometime, someday, their children will not haveto work with their hands. Office jobs are moredesirable they are cleaner, pay better and have morestatus than jobsin manufacture. So as blue collarobs disappeared, and thenation waspromised that white collar jobs would taketheirplace, there was littleoutcry.Butnow the white collar jobs are disappearingtoo. The USA isinthe midst of whatis being called a joblessrecovery. For 43 consecutive months, manufacturers have cutthenumber of workers ontheirpayrolls. TheUSA isinthe longestemploymentslumpsincethe 1930s, whenthenation was mired inthe GreatDepression.Theseemingly robusteconomic recovery, with its 6.1 per centgrowth inthe last half of 2003, just hasnotcreated jobs. Unliketheprevioustwo decades, which saw job growth averaging morethan a quarter of amillion jobs a month, current job growth isnegative or flat. The last month reported, February, did note a netgain of 21,000 jobs, butthey were all inthegovernmentsector. Unemploymentis officially pegged at 5.6per cent, but becausetheeconomic outlook isso bleak, many havestopped looking for work and thereforeareno longer counted as unemployed. Ifthe labor force had notshrunk inthe last half year, theunemployment rate would be 6.4 per cent. Many economists believethe actual number of unemployed iscloserto 10 per cent.As Americans confronttheevaporation oftheir dreams, they are beginningto look at wheretheir jobs havegone. Whatthey find, a discovery greatly abetted by the media, isthattheir jobs havegone, or aregoing, tondia.tshould be made clearthat India inthis regard is a synecdoche (a term of rhetorical analysis for a part

which stands forthe whole). The firstgreat offshoring ofservice jobs occurred when back-office work andcall centers wentto Northern Ireland over a decade ago. The Northern Irish, like Indians, were available atlow wages, they spoke English and atthetimethere wereexcellentphone hookupsto Belfast. Today,excellenttelephone links areglobal and there are many sources of lower-wage workers who speak perfectEnglish. Sometimes English isnoteven required.The offshoring of white collar jobsisthe current Americannightmare. Theprofessional jobs, the well-payingobs, the future jobs ofthe USAs youngpeople, seem to be moving across distantseasto countries wherepeople will work forsalariesso low thatthey would notpay the rent on a small American flat. Soon, peoplefear, all that will be left are jobsthat cannot beexported: flipping hamburgers, making bedsin hotels, pickingupthegarbage.ndeed, in an attemptto skew the dismal statistics on manufacturing jobs, President Bush proposed in his

annual economic messageto the Congressthat cooking hamburgers, notoriously one ofthe lowest-payingof jobs, be henceforward defined as a manufacturing job. Butthen, Bush seemsto have a tinear, unableto hear whatisgoing oninthenation hegoverns. Heguessed wrongly, deeply wrongly insettingthetenorof his whole administration:itsnotterroristplanes flyinginto skyscrapersthat keeps Americans awake atnight, butthesensethat future ofthe middle class and workingpeopleisebbing away, their jobs more andmore often landing on foreignshores. The Americansseetheir futureseeping away to the Philippines, to


8/10

Poland, to Russia, of courseto China, and especially especially to India.Assaid earlier, India hasgreat advantagesinthe world labor market. Its cost of living and wagestandardsare, by the measure ofthe developed countries, low;it has a huge highly educated work force, with, forexample, over 5,20,000 IT engineers; and itsprofessional workers are fluentin English.So when Americans bemoanthe offshoring of white collar jobs, itis, unhappily, India that most often comesto mind. Partly this results of from an awareness of how attractive are Indiasprofessional services, highlytrained and of modestprice. Forrester Research found, forinstance, that morethan half of all outsourced ITobsgo to India.Partly itis related to the fact tragic fact, not defensiblein any way that colorprejudicesometimes runsdeepinthe Americanpsyche, so thatit may be morepolitically orsocially acceptableto be upset by Indiansoftwareengineersthan Russian ones, by Indian call centersthan Northern Irish ones.Partly itis, as with China, thesize ofthesetwo behemoth nations, both feltto be future competitors ratherthan juniorpartnersinthe world economy: India is a potential rival, Poland and Korea arenot.While China has taken more jobs from US workersthan India, thereseemsnot as much outcry against job

outsourcingto East Asia asthereis againstthe movement of jobsto India. Asnoted earlier, onsome deeppsychic level, the loss of manufacturing jobsispartially acceptableto Americans. The contemporaryAmerican dream says manufacturing jobs are being lost because developed nations are headinginto aknowledge-driven, 21st century economy. Information-based jobs, talking-to-people jobs, office jobs:thesewereto bethesanctum into which thenextgeneration of Americans would move. Now, more and more ofthose jobs are being offshored, and often offshored to India.Added to the Americansituationis a political variable. Itis a truism inthe USA:the lower onesincome,status, age, the less likely oneisto vote. So voters are disproportionately well-employed, professional,established intheir jobs. Offshoring of white collar jobsthreatensthevery core ofthevotingpublic and so ithas become a major factorin US politics.There will betwo majorissuesinthenextelection. Ifnational security meaning, primarily, the ongoing waragainst a facelessterrorist adversary isseen by voters astheprimary issue, President Bush, whoportrays himself as having a solid and capable hand onthetiller oftheship ofstate, will likely win re-election. Ifthe falteringeconomy despite record low interest rates and a risingstock market, jobs arenotncreasing and joblessnessis onthe rise isthe central concern, John Kerry will likely bethenextPresident. There will, of course, be what are called wedgeissues abortion, homosexual marriage, concernsaboutimmigration butthey will function asthe Ram Templein Ayodhya functionsin India, to muddy thewatersso thatthe central issues of war and prosperity will not dominate.A recentpoll indicatesthatsupport for freetradeis droppinginevery income category, and falling mostinthe high incomegroupsthat moststrongly supported freetrade just five years ago. Intheprimaries, everyDemocratic candidate for Presidentexpressed concern about job losses overseas;the likely nominee, JohnKerry, who supported freetrade agreements until recently, hasthus far resisted calling for renegotiatedmultinational trade agreements. Nonetheless, speaking ofthe Bush administration he recently proclaimed,They have delivered a double blow to Americas workers, 3 million jobs destroyed ontheir watch, and nowthey wantto export more of our jobs overseas? Kerry haspledged that assoon as heiselected, he willorder a 120-day review of all existingtrade agreementsto ensurethat ourtradepartners are living uptotheir labor and environment obligations and thattrade agreements areenforceable and are balanced forAmericas workers.But Bush and his challenger may feel a need to respond morestrongly yetto whatisgoing oninthe bodypolitic. Ingeneral, Americansexistin a different world thantheirpoliticians. Whilethe majority of Congressand thetwo presidential candidates courtthe corporateinterests fortheirpotential forsizeable campaign


9/10

contributions, thereis a tectonic shifttakingplaceinthe Americanpopulace. Thespecter of continuing jobosses a major financial publicationsuggested that as many as onethird of all US jobs arevulnerabletooffshoring hasshakenthe American middle classto its core. Theresnot yet a call forprotectionism, butthereis mountingpressure forsomevariety ofgovernment actionto haltthe outflow of white collar jobs.Theproblem of offshoringis a difficult one for Americans. Caughtin aneconomic squeeze real wages

have been flat for 30 years, and the middle classisshrinking there arethree ways an American family canmaintainitsstandard of living. Oneisto work longer hours: Americansnow work longer hoursthan workersn any otherindustrialized country, even Japan. Another, so widespread it has becomethenorm, is for alladultsin a family unit, not justthe husband, to work. Thethird isto subsidizethe cost ofnecessities bymporting low-pricegoods. Today, a pair ofshoes, a shirt, a television, a cookingpot, a computer, cost faressininflation-adjusted dollarsthanthey did 10 or 15 years ago. For Americans, globalizations mainbenefits havegoneto those who own and run MNCs and international banks, butsome ofits benefits haveunderwrittentheeconomic stability of American families.Thatstability isnow doubly imperiled. If offshoringis curtailed, the continuingsubsidy to Americanconsumers ofeverything from electronicsto apparel to telephoneservicesto computerservices may end,and prices will riseso thatthenecessities of life are less affordable. If offshoringisnot curtailed, Americanobs may disappear, or Americans may find themselves working forincreasingly lower wages asemployers

try to keeppace with the downward movement of wagesinthe world economy.

Which brings our attention back to India. Itis hard to say just what may happen. Thereis a seriousproposalnthe US Congressto deny federal aid to companies who movetheiremployment overseas. There are callsfornot just re-examination of multinational tradetreaties, but renegotiation ofthem. Thevisa policiesthatcurrently allow foreignprofessionalseasier accessto the US workplace may betightened. Then again, thedemands of arguments of MNCs, free-market capitalists and internationalists may hold sway, and freetrade, regardless ofits consequences for US workers, may continue unrestricted and unabated.Thegreatest dangerto India, of course, isthatthe USA may movetoward a protectionistpolicy, through themposition oftariffs ortheerection of barriersto offshoring ofservice jobs. Thereis, however, no movetowardsseriousprotectionism atthepresent moment. Still, theissue of offshoring has been raised to a veryhigh level inthepublic consciousness.While what will ultimately transpireisnotevident, the offshoring of jobs, and inparticularthe offshoring ofhigh-tech and professional service jobsto India, is onthe USAs agenda.

The author, a Visiting Fulbright Professor at Calcutta University, teaches atthe University of Vermont.Copyright 2004 The Statesman

Send this page to a friend


10/10

outsourcing in the developing

Documents