DOI: 10.5176/2251-2349_HRMPD13.11
Authors: Torben Andersen
Abstract: The fluctuations in world economy during the last two decades have presented us with several interesting challenges, when it comes to the movement of labor. First and foremost the increasing economic globalization [1] has led to unseen growth figures for more than a decade, up to the crisis in the world economy in autumn 2008, and then afterwards the major recession, characterizing specific sectors as well as countries. We have, in other words, experienced a phase where globalization was making the world supposedly flatter [2] and much more potentially mobile for managers and employees and with the arrival of the recession, a contraction of the different national economies, leading to major restriction and obstacles in this area within companies, i.e. the world is curved and mobility patterns are highly unpredictable [3]. It is in many respects a time period of many – and perhaps profound – changes and this also goes for mobility patterns among employees and managers.
One of often discussed topics in the area of international mobility of labor is, what some have called the end of the classical (gold card) expatriate, and perhaps also of the expatriate in general. The claim has been presented during the last couple of decades, and in particular supported by the empirical mapping of new, and more flexible, employment models, where the old, and supposedly inflexible model, is succeeded by a variety of modern approaches e.g. short-term assignments based on employees acting as frequent flyers, flexi workers etc. [4]. The more flexible employment models vary not only in form and time, but also in contents, i.e. pay level, fringe benefits, extras etc. are reduced to a much lower level if not removed (some companies are removing benefits for employees working in another country with the EU). And this has – since the arrival of the economic crisis – been even more relevant for many companies. This is, indeed very much in contrast to the pre-2008 crisis large focus on the contents of the employment model, in order to convince the expat to take the assignment [5]. We have, on the one hand, seen companies during the growth period having focused increasingly on benefit and support services as a key element in recruitment, selection, retention [6], and on the other hand, many of the modern employment models have not included these extras, both because of the general trend toward fewer gold card expats and because of the economic recession. The question is therefore whether it is possible to see the end of the classical expat or perhaps a sort of a split up, a polarization, in the topic covered in the different employment models?
The continuation of the classical expatriate in some form is supported by the argument that there seems to be a need for a certain pool of internationally competent managers and executives, in order to manage the economic globalization process (recession or not). In addition Benson, Pérez-Nordtvedt, and Datta claimed in 2009 that the number of first time expats was increasing [7], and that this type of employees was still occupying a very important role in the running of the multinational companies (MNCs), both in relation to control [8]; [9], [10] and in relation to management development [11]; [12]; [13] and [14]. In particular Evans and colleagues argue that the expatriates still are powerful vehicles for global coordination and that this type of employment is maintained and developed by much more open intra-company networks of career opportunities [13]. This could mean that we in future will see that foreign assignments take several new forms – in larger companies being based on an infrastructure as mentioned or in small and medium-sized companies being based on external providers like e.g. the recruitment company Stepstone (being present in 11 countries) advertising for engineers working abroad, e.g. Siemens Denmark looking for an employee for their Munich branch or Vestas headquarters in Denmark searching for a person to a job in Malmö and one in Dortmund.
Finally the pressure on the classical expat has come from a somehow new direction, and perhaps in a much more profound manner – the increasing number of people going abroad to live and work, doing it without any prior company attachment (see initially [16]; [17] and [18] for empirical studies rooted in New Zealand, Finland, and the US. The question is whether the group of self-initiated behaviors (overseas experiences, foreign assignments, and career strategies) studied here, could mean a breakup of older employment patterns and leaving the classical model. Will it be possible to detect more profound changes characterizing longer-term foreign stays, perhaps individuals moving toward immigration patterns?
It is, however empirically difficult to precisely determine the phenomena self-initiated, i.e. ‘not being sent abroad by employer but on own initiative,’ without asking directly and perhaps checking this with the company they are working for. And how do we interpret the behavior of a young engineer, first being sent out on an assignment and then looking for a next job out there – is this self-initiated career behavior? We will return to this in the concluding section. But here has been an increasing interest in differentiating the characteristics of self-initiated career from those of the more standardized expatriate contracts, and in particular the individual background, motivation, and compensation principle and development [19].
Updating...