離岸外包的，健全的商業策略呢？

Is Offshore Outsourcing good Corporate Business Strategy? If the objective is cost savings due to labor arbitrage then in the long run organizations will fail to achieve that objective. But, if diversification of labor is the objective (read my blog 是離岸外包良好的公司的經營策略？如果目的是節省成本，由於勞動力套利，然後在長遠而言，組織將無法實現這一目標，但如果多元化的勞動是客觀的（看過我的博客 Globalization of Labor 全球化勞動 ) only then offshoring begins to make se ）只有這樣，外包開始，使硒 nse. There are two kinds of offshoring: NSE的。有兩種外包：

Captive Offshoring: Organization setting up its own shop in a different country. 專屬自保外包：組織成立自己的店在不同的國家。
Third Party Offshoring: This is outsourcing to the third party that are in offshore location. 第三黨的外包：這是外包給第三黨是在境外的位置。

According to the article 據文章 Captive Offshoring Centers Are Imploding 專屬自保離岸中心的爆 recent survey shows that the captive offshoring has failed to achieve cost savings for many organizations. The reason for the failure is that no one knows the overhead cost to start a Captive Center. 最近的一項調查表明，該專屬自保外包未能達到節省成本，許多組織。失敗的原因是，沒有人知道間接費用，開始對專屬自保中心。 All organizations go by only one number - labor arbitrage: difference between costs of labor in two countries. 所有組織去是只由一個號碼-勞動套利：區別勞動成本在兩個國家。 But there are several overhead costs like setup, management, attrition, communication etc that are never factored into calculating ROI. There are some intangible costs like time zone impact, language impact and impact of cultural differences. 但有幾個間接成本一樣，安裝，管理，減員，通信等是從來沒有考慮的因素計算的投資報酬率。還有一些無形成本一樣，時區的影響，語言的衝擊和影響的文化差異。 Then, does Captive Offshoring ever make sense? Yes, only if the organization plans to expand their market in that country. For example: Boeing is looking towards India to expand its market share in the next five years. It makes perfect sense to have labor allocated closer to the market. But for organizations that are regional and are not planning on expanding to India it makes no sense to have a captive offshore center there. 那麼，圈養外包以往任何時候都意義？是的，只有當該組織計劃擴大他們的市場在該國。例如：波音公司正在研究對印度，以擴大其市場份額在未來5年內，它使完美的意識，有勞動分配更接近市場，但對組織，是區域和沒有規劃就擴大到印度，它是沒有意義的有一個專屬自保離岸中心。

Outsourcing to pure play offshoring unit like Infosys or Wipro any better? Again, in the long run as wage differential begin to narrow, third party offshoring will also begin to loose advantage because of labor arbitrage. But large offshoring organizations can take advantage of economies of scale to streamline business process. In an effort to be lean in this hypercompetitive environment the companies should outsource / offshore tasks that is non-core. I think any business activities/processes that are not core competency or enabler of that core competency for the organization is a candidate for outsourcing. But, organizations need to look at offshoring as one of the many options. The other options that are available are near shoring and in shoring. Organizations should carefully evaluate and align their vision with the outsourcing organization before building the partnership. The Corporation should also factor in the overhead cost for retraining their employees that are impacted by moving the job elsewhere. So, the bottom line is: Careful analysis of offshoring to pure play in the context of other outsourcing strategy is very important. 外包給純中發揮外包單位一樣， Infosys公司Wipro公司或任何更好嗎？再次，從長遠來看，作為工資差別開始縮小，第三黨的外包也將開始鬆動優勢，因為勞動力套利，但大型外包組織可以利用的經濟規模，以簡化業務流程，在一努力做到精益在這hypercompetitive環境，公司應該外包/離岸的任務，就是非核心，我認為任何商業活動/進程是沒有核心競爭力或創造這一核心競爭力為組織是候選人的外包，但組織需要看看外包作為其中的許多選項。其他選項，分別是附近的支護和在支護。機構應審慎評估並調整他們的視野與外包之前，組織建設的夥伴關係。該公司也應因素，在間接費用，為他們的僱員再培訓是影響移動的工作在其他地方，因此，底線是：仔細分析了離岸外包，以純發揮語境中的其他外包策略是非常重要的。

In short, Offshore Outsourcing is becoming viable model for businesses to stay nimble and adapt to changing competitive environment. Organizations need to look at offshoring as a long term strategy in: 在短期內，離岸外包正成為可行的模式，為企業留下來的靈活和適應不斷變化的競爭環境。組織需要看看外包作為一個長遠的策略，在：