Outsourcing is a business arrangement in which one organization contracts with another organization to perform services that it normally would have done itself. This occurs generally in areas outside of an organization’s core competencies in order to take advantage of cost savings.
Several different types of outsourcing should be distinguished. Probably the most common kind involves a private company hiring another company in its own country to provide certain services. For example, a computer manufacturer, such as IBM, may hire an outside contractor to clean its facilities. In this case, the service provided is clearly outside of IBM’s core competencies.
A second kind of outsourcing would be a government organization hiring a private company to do some of its work. A typical example here would be a school contracting out its food service, so that the workers providing the food service are private employees and not government employees. Here again, serving food is clearly not within a school’s core competencies.
The most controversial type of outsourcing occurs when a private company hires a foreign company to do work for it. This outside contracting, known as “offshore” outsourcing, has become more and more common in the past 20 years. Much computer technical support for U.S. companies has been outsourced to India through a variety of subcontractors in recent years.
Why do organizations outsource? Not surprisingly, the chief reason is to reduce costs. If the company has its own employees perform the service, then it must pay them as it would any of its employees. For a company that treats its employees well, this could be a large cost—the company may well be able to find outside workers who can do this non-core service adequately at a much lower price. The workers may be cheaper because they live in a foreign low-wage country (in the case of offshore outsourcing), or they may be cheaper because they are nonunion or live in low-wage areas of the United States (in the case of domestic outsourcing).
Outsourcing may also provide the company with access to more expert employees and more up-to-date technologies. The vendor—the company to whom business is outsourced—often has highly skilled employees who are specialists in specific areas. By focusing on particular services, vendors are more easily able to adopt new technologies and avoid technological obsolescence. A company that tries to perform services that are outside of its areas of core competency may be stretching itself too thin and be unable to take advantage of new technologies as they come into use.
By hiring outside workers, a company is able to turn fixed costs into variable costs and avoid the costs associated with constantly hiring and training new workers. The ease of changing vendors compared to changing full-time, in-house employees gives the company significant flexibility in running its business. The fixed costs of the in-house employees are by definition unchangeable in the short run; they can make it that much more difficult for the company to respond nimbly to market conditions. Outsourcing turns these into variable costs, thereby enabling management to react better to the vicissitudes of the market.
The main disadvantage of outsourcing is that the company may lose some control over production; it must rely on some outside entity that is under different management. Instead of dictating how production should be organized, the company must accept whatever organization and management the vendor chooses. This would generally not be acceptable in core operations, but in ancillary operations it can be a risk worth taking.
Another disadvantage concerns offshore outsourcing. A company in a developed country, such as the United States, can count on political-economic stability for its domestic operations; it is unlikely that its production will be disrupted by external social or political forces. If, however, it outsources to vendors in an unstable country, it may be subject to such disruptions. This, of course, is not as great a concern as it would be if the company was producing for itself (not through a vendor) in these countries, but it still can cause problems. On the other hand, this is an advantage of outsourcing—a company can take advantage of a low-cost country without fully committing itself to producing in that country. If disruptions do occur to the vendors, the company can fairly easily leave; a company that is producing under its own auspices will have a more difficult time getting out.
Although outsourcing is generally undertaken by individual, private companies to increase their own profitability, it has socioeconomic ramifications beyond the company’s bottom line. It is offshore outsourcing, in particular, that generates the most controversy, since it affects workers and society in two different countries.
First, how does outsourcing affect the vendor country? Clearly, jobs shift to this country to take advantage of the low wages, a benefit to the workers involved. As long as the pay and working conditions are reasonable—within the socioeconomic context of the country—then the vendor’s employees are positively affected by outsourcing. If they are being exploited, again by the standards of their country, then it is perhaps not such a positive situation. Even in this case, however, from the point of view of a free market economist, the workers must be benefiting as they have voluntarily offered their services to the vendor. Supporters of globalization consistently argue that foreign workers take these jobs precisely because they are better than the alternatives.
The situation is quite different from the point of view of workers (or potential workers) in the company that is outsourcing. These workers are clearly losing jobs to the foreign country. These losses, which are increasingly affecting higher-skilled, better-paying service workers, have consequently become a rising source of contention over the past decade in the United States.
How significant are these losses to the U.S. economy? An estimate by Forrester Research puts the losses due to offshore outsourcing at 3.4 million white-collar jobs between 2000 and 2015. Given that the U.S. workforce currently consists of about 152 million individuals, this amounts to an annual loss of about 0.15% of that labor force to offshore outsourcing. Thus the macroeconomic effects are not particularly significant. In absolute terms, though, 3.4 million unemployed people represent a tremendous loss to society as a whole. These numbers are even more problematic to the individuals losing their jobs or not getting jobs in the first place (and incidentally, we would never know who these people are). No job means no income, regardless of the reason— unemployment is one of the worst things that can happen to an individual under capitalism.
Historically, manufacturing has been outsourced for many years. For example, U.S. clothing manufacturers have been hiring outside contractors to make the garments for a long time. Currently, a large portion of clothing sold in the United States under a U.S. company’s label is produced in China by companies contracted by that U.S. company. This, in essence, is shipping U.S. jobs overseas and has been a concern of U.S. workers for some time.
What has changed recently is that it is no longer only manufacturing jobs that are outsourced. With advances in technology, services can now be offshore outsourced to places far, far away from the original company. Now it is not only blue-collar workers who are directly affected by outsourcing, but also more skilled, white-collar workers who have reason to complain. Newly outsourced technology services include such activities as software development, Web site designing, and technical service call centers. Certain non-core business processes are also now widely outsourced, such as back office operations, finance and accounting, payroll maintenance, and sales and marketing. The reach of outsourcing extends to many occupations, therefore putting it as a problem on the agenda for most U.S. workers.
White-collar workers, who in the past could conveniently ignore the manufacturing jobs being shifted overseas, now must confront the very same problems themselves. What was argued in the past—that the loss of jobs to foreign workers was simply the result of competitive, free market forces that only strengthen the economy—seems hollow now. Many white-collar workers have joined the chorus calling for restrictions on offshore outsourcing.
- Anderson, Sarah and John Cavanagh. 2004. “Toward a Progressive View on Outsourcing.” The Nation 278(March 22):22-26.
- Baker, Dean, Gerald Epstein, and Robert Pollin, eds. 1998. Globalization and Progressive Economic Policy. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
- Krugman, Paul. 2000. The Return of Depression Economics. New York: Norton.
- McCarthy, John. 2004. “Near-Term Growth of Offshoring Accelerating.” Forrester Research. Retrieved March 25, 2017 (https://books.google.com/books/about/Near_term_Growth_of_Offshoring_Accelerat.html?id=tCPDHAAACAAJ&redir_esc=y).
- Offner, Amy, Alejandro Reuss, and Chris Sturr, eds. 2004. Real World Globalization. 8th ed. Cambridge, MA: Dollars & Sense.
- Stiglitz, Joseph. 2006. Making Globalization Work. New York: Norton.
This example Outsourcing Essay is published for educational and informational purposes only. If you need a custom essay or research paper on this topic please use our writing services. EssayEmpire.com offers reliable custom essay writing services that can help you to receive high grades and impress your professors with the quality of each essay or research paper you hand in.