Alan Blinder

...now browsing by tag

 
 

The Economic, Competitive, Social and Political Implications of KPO

Sunday, March 14th, 2010

My last three blogs (The Growth of Knowledge Process Outsourcing, Evalueserve’s KPO Service Offerings, Understanding Evalueserve’s KPO Business) discussed the emergence and rapid growth and evolution of the Knowledge Process Outsourcing (KPO) industry and market. As I discussed, this industry, which was borne of and enabled by the boom in IT Services offshoring, takes the offshoring of services into totally new directions. The most basic of this work extends the IT industry’s experience in outsourcing standardized, structured, rules-based tasks into a number of more broadly defined, less structured and more discretionary functions.

The Evolution of Offshorable Services Jobs

More importantly, just as IT outsourcing progressed up the value chain from ministerial jobs, such as the maintenance of old legacy application into more conceptual work, such as in architecting of distributed Internet-based applications, so too is the outsourcing of a broad range of other “knowledge-based functions”. KPO is rapidly extending the offshoring of knowledge-based services:

  • Beyond jobs that consist of standardized, repeatable processes, are easy to learn and can be readily monitored and tracked (such as application maintenance and call center operator);
  • To those that require analytical (like financial and market analysis), conceptual (like legal research and architectural design) and, in some instances, innovative (scientific research and industrial design) skills. These services are typically less structured and manageable, entail greater discretion and, increasingly, require ongoing coordination with professionals in other countries.

Services Continunium

But to understand the real implications of KPO, you must combine the rapid growth in the type and number of jobs that can be performed offshore, with the:

  • Rapid growth in the number of foreign—and declining number of U.S.—professionals with science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) training;
  • New information technology and communications (ITC) capabilities that allow work to be seamlessly performed and transferred across geographies and time zones; and
  • New management and collaboration practices that permit business processes to be componentized and workers from remote locations to seamless collaborate on complex tasks.

The result, as Princeton University’s Alan Blinder concluded in a 2007 study that was corroborated by an independent Harvard Business School study—between 21% and 42% of U.S. jobs have the potential of being outsourced. (Not that they necessarily will be outsourced, but that they are potentially outsourceable.) And, unlike the case with manufacturing jobs before them, the majority of these new positions are knowledge jobs that typically require college degrees.

Opportunities for U.S. Knowledge Workers

What does the growth and changing nature of knowledge outsourcing in general, and KPO in particular, mean for U.S. knowledge workers? Two things:

  • Regardless of whether Blinder and HBS’s numbers are right, the U.S. will undoubtedly lose millions of traditionally secure white collar jobs to offshore providers over the next decade; and
  • Although Indian providers will continue to source many jobs offshore, even they will be hiring American workers as firms including Evalueserve, Infosys, Wipro and Tata Consulting Services open, acquire and expand delivery centers in the United States.

What does all this mean to current and prospective U.S. knowledge workers? As I have discussed in recent posts, the U.S. will always retain millions of existing knowledge jobs and will continue to produce millions of new ones. The difference is that employers will look for very different types of skills than in the past. Those workers that Thomas Friedman calls “the average practitioners”—those people who perform routine tasks and those that wait for work to be handed to them—are becoming an endangered species.

Knowledge workers that hope to qualify for the secure jobs of the future—both in domestic and offshore firms—will require different sets of skills than those of Friedman’s average practitioners. As discussed in my report IT Companies as Catalysts in Creating the 21st Century Workforce (click here to see an excerpt or  here to request a free copy of the full report), these workers must be able to innovate, analyze and communicate. They must increasingly possess a new set of core skills that include:

  • IT, not necessarily in developing and managing IT environments, but in understanding which IT tools are most applicable to a chosen field and how to apply them to deliver business value;
  • Communications, the combination of writing, speaking, presentation (and optionally others, such as multimedia and video) that will be so essential in selling one’s ideas;
  • Internet (to the extent that such skills will not be innate in new-generation workers), which provides all employees complete access to all the information they need and the social networking tools and techniques that will be increasingly required to find allies, build consensus and effectively sell one’s ideas (both within and outside of their organizations); and
  • Mathematics (particularly analytic techniques and supporting capabilities such as statistics, modeling and simulations) to help workers derive true insight from, and develop innovative solutions based on the huge volumes of digital information that are becoming available to all knowledge workers in all disciplines.

People who possess such skills will produce higher value for their employers (whether domestic or foreign), enjoy higher salaries and better job security and will be in greater demand by other companies. Those that lack such skills will suffer the opposite fate

Is the U.S. Losing the Luxury of Educational Choice?

Sunday, September 20th, 2009

The U.S. emerged from World War II as the richest country in the world. Although our prosperity has certainly hit a number of speed bumps over the 60 years, our prosperity has given our children an unprecedented luxury. They could study virtually any subjects in which they had an interest and, assuming they did reasonably well in college, have a reasonable chance of obtaining a good job and earning at least, a middle-class lifestyle.

Have we outgrown this luxury? Should students who hope for a reasonable shot at the American Dream follow the lead of Chinese and Indian students by focusing their studies in the fields that offer the best prospects of employment, rather than those that feed their passions?

Realities of the Great Recession

The traditional American educational luxury of pursuing one’s passion (like many other luxuries during our current mini-depression), is beginning to look less and less affordable. Young adults, aged 20-24, currently face 15% unemployment, up from 8.2% in 2007. While recent college graduates certainly fare much better than those with high school degrees, the National Association of Colleges and Employersestimates that corporate entry-level hiring has fallen by more than 20% and that only 19.7% of 2009 graduates who have so far applied for jobs have actually received offers.

In fact, it claims that the total number of jobs for 2009 graduates will fall by 22% from 2008—during a year in which colleges are graduating more students than any year in the last decade. Moreover, many of those students who are lucky enough to receive offers are having to settle for lower-level positions, jobs outside their preferred field and jobs that do not teach the skills needed to compete with those who graduate two or three years from now.

The damage, according to recent study by Yale School of Management economist Lisa Kahn, can be long-lasting. Graduates who join a company during a recession (1981 for her study) not only start at lower wages, but they generally continue to earn lower wages and find it difficult to compete with younger, more recent graduates when normal hiring patterns resume.

And one thing is certain. Things will become more difficult before they improve. Although we have begun to see a number of promising “green shoots,” most economists agree that unemployment rates will rise—probably above 10%—before they are likely to begin to decline around mid-2010. Moreover, it is likely to be 2014 before our economy will produce the same number of jobs as in 2007—and that does not even begin to account for the 100,000 new jobs that must be created each month just too keep up with new labor force entrants. More challenging still, globalization will claim a growing number of new jobs and, increasingly, a growing percentage of relatively high-paying knowledge jobs.

As I have discussed in previous reports (“Why the Private Sector Must Develop Socially Responsive Workforce Globalization Policies“) and articles (“Welcome to the Global Knowledge Economy“),  two separate 2007 and 2008 studies by Princeton Economics Professor Alan Blinder and the Harvard Business School concluded that a minimum of 21% and up to a potential of 42% of U.S. jobs had the potential of being offshored.(Not that they will be offshored mind you, but they have the potential.) The greatest future challenges will occur not in manufacturing, but in knowledge jobs—those that generally require college degrees and that pay moderate to high wages.

Accommodations to the New Normal

Although this sounds pretty gruesome, all is not gloom and doom. Some newly-minted graduates have had no problem finding the jobs they desire. Some even have the luxury of selecting among two or more attractive offers (fewer offers than in previous years to be sure, but still enough to provide a choice). As discussed in the Council of Economic Advisors’ July 2009 report, “Preparing the Workers of Today for the Jobs of Tomorrow”, these offers tend to concentrate in:

  1. A relative handful of industries, such as healthcare, education, aerospace, pharmaceuticals and environmental sciences; and
  2. Job functions and disciplines that entail specialized, post-secondary education, ranging from associate- and vocational-level programs (like medical records technicians and home health aides), to college degrees (registered nurses and teachers), through post-graduate degrees in fields such as medicine, biochemistry and electrical engineering. The Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2008-09 provides details on jobs that offer the best and worst prospects through 2016.

This, however, begs the question. Have U.S. children lost—or are they in danger of losing—the luxury of using education to pursue our passions? Must we begin to view higher education as we view apprenticeships and view vocational schools—as preparations for a job, rather than for a preparation for life?

I don’t think so. As I will discuss in my next blog, I believe that students not only can continue to use education to pursue their passions—they must do so to optimize their prospects. A relative handful of students may, as they always have, have the opportunity to reshape realities to accommodate their own interests and needs. The rest of us, however, while still able to pursue our educational and occupational passions, may have to make a few accommodations to an environment that is increasingly being called the “New Normal.”

Welcome to the Global Knowledge Economy

Monday, June 15th, 2009

We live and work in a global economy. In most cases, the signs of a global workforce are so integrated in our day-to-day lives that we don’t even notice them, such as when we buy products that have been made overseas (whether from Wal-Mart or Gucci), or when we sign a tax return that was actually prepared by an accountant in India. Increasingly, however, the signs of a global workforce become so apparent that they force their way into our consciousness, such as when we struggle to understand an Indian customer service rep or when jobs in our community fall victim to Chinese manufacturers. Occasionally, global workforce practices become high political drama, as around immigration laws, NAFTA, U.S-Chinese economic relations and the staging of protests and riots around international trade and economic summits.

The Globalization of Knowledge Services

But for all the attention, one rapidly growing and ultimately much more critical aspect of workforce globalization has largely escaped broad public attention—the globalization of knowledge jobs. Although most U.S. IT workers have seen how Indian IT jobs are migrating steadily up the value chain (from basic application testing to complex development and even application architecture), this is only the first and most advanced of offshore entries into high-value, knowledge-based services. Consider, for example, that:

  • China (followed by the U.S.) and India are now the most popular locations for multinational corporations to establish research and development laboratories, with China alone housing more than 700 such facilities;
  • “Medical tourist” hospitals in countries such as Thailand and Indian boast world-class surgeons already operate on close to 1 million American patients per year. Some U.S. insurance companies not only cover such procedures, they now offer financial incentives for patients to use these hospitals; and
  • India graduates about 10,000 Chartered Financial Analysts (CFAs) per year, more than any country other than the U.S.—and this is despite the fact that the cost of obtaining the certification is almost as high as likely first year salaries.

The list goes on and on. Accounting, financial analysis, architectural, market analysis and legal research jobs, once the exclusive province of developed country professionals, have all begun to move to offshore providers. And as shown in the figure below, emerging country knowledge jobs are pushing rapidly up the value chain, from those that require relatively rote process-based skills, to analytical, conceptual and, increasingly, to high-level innovative tasks.

The Global Knowledge Services Continuum

Portent or ParanoiaGiven the relative lack of public attention to this phenomenon, one may be tempted to dismiss the examples as isolated incidents. Tempting, but not likely. Consider, for example, the findings of two separate studies, a 2007 study by Princeton Economics Professor Alan Blinder and a 2008 project by the Harvard Business School. Each concluded, using very different methodologies, that a minimum of 21%—and up to a potential of 42%—of U.S. jobs have the potential of being “offshoreable.” (Not that they actually will be offshored, mind you, but that they have the potential.)

As scary as the numbers may be, the trends behind the numbers provide even greater pause. While manufacturing jobs used to face the greatest threat of being offshored, knowledge jobs—those that generally require college degrees and that pay moderate to high wages—are now the most vulnerable to offshoring.

So what can a country—much less a company or an individual—do?

  • Fight the trend by prohibiting it, imposing punitive penalties or by publicly pillorying companies and executives that engage in offshoring? Yet this can ignite a firestorm of inflationary price increases, invite the enmity of countries that have already bought into U.S. championed vision of free and open trade, reduce the competiveness of U.S. corporations and chase many of our most successful businesses to reincorporate in other countries.
  • Ignore it and hope that it will go away—or wait until the problem becomes so acute that we are forced into immediate reaction? This is certainly a time-honored approach to difficult problems. And it may work, at least if we are willing to sit and watch as millions of previously secure jobs disappear, and families and communities are disrupted. Then, we will need to wait for the market to eventually come up with its own solutions, for our educational institutions to adjust and for society and governments to foot the bill.

Surely, there’s a better way. What do you think?