• Technology
  • CFO.com | US

Reader Opinions on the Offshoring Backlash

Only 5 percent of those who are offshoring today say public disapproval will cause them to cut back.

In our exclusive CFO survey, 275 finance executives shared their offshoring plans, experiences, and opinions. When asked, “What is your opinion of the recent backlash against offshore outsourcing?” our readers provided a torrent of responses.

We divided the responses below into two groups: Comments from executives who are offshoring now or who plan to (comprising 28 percent of respondents) and comments from executives who don’t offshore and don’t plan to (72 percent). If you note some overlap between the responses from the two groups, perhaps that’s because only 15 percent of all respondents think the backlash will last long — and only 5 percent of those who are offshoring today say public disapproval will cause them to cut back.

Comments from Executives Who Are Offshoring Now or Who Plan To

If it is due to a shortage within a specific field I do not see the harm. However, if it truly reduces employment in the U.S. it should be taxed heavily.

As a manufacturer of low-tech products, we are unable to compete as more foreign sourced products come into our country. With the lower cost structure in China, we are currently fighting to survive despite trimming all costs including a 40 percent reduction in the workforce.

Until U.S. consumers are willing to pay a premium for “U.S. products,” “offshore outsourcing” will always be a consideration for companies to stay competitive in the global market. The “backlash” needs to be redefined and consumers need to be reeducated.

It’s cost driven. The public as consumers vote with their pocketbooks.

I believe the backlash is emotional, and the proposed solutions make matters worse. The solution is to make our economy more competitive, by reducing skyrocketing legal bills, health-care costs, feedstock costs, and costs of regulation.

It is unfortunately a lot of hype fueled by emotion, often by those who fail to understand the benefits of free trade.

Global economic efficiency, by definition, results in local economic disruption. Strong economies will assimilate the disruption, over time; global economic integration holds our best hope reducing global conflict.

Normal reaction one would expect in light of unemployment rates and current levels of patriotism related to September 11th and current Mideast activities.

It is politically fueled, but a serious issue nonetheless.

The allegations [regarding offshoring] are total BS and completely myopic. Unencumbered global trade, which includes services, is vital to a nation’s economic long-term growth and success. America’s economy is one of the strongest in the world due to its dynamism and churn. We cannot become Luddites or will suffer the backlash from other nations who will retaliate with their own tariffs etc. We must lead in free trade to encourage other nations to do the same.

Not based on facts, politically motivated. Job loss is due to productivity gains, not offshoring. It is actually improving the efficiency and bottom-lines of U.S. businesses. I don’t believe that it is in our country’s best interest to pay artificially inflated wages in order to save low-paying jobs.

Discuss

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *