My previous post on international itinerants introduced this new form of expatriates, and brought up some managerial implications on how to keep expatriates that are traditionally loyal to one employer from becoming international itinerants. However, as Banai and Harry (2004) state, ‘failed’ expatriation is only one of the reasons for leaving one’s current employer. Hence, irrespective of the scope of an employer’s repatriation programs and efforts of retaining employees, professionals of such types as cosmopolitans, mavericks and novelty seekers may still choose to become an international itinerant. Naturally, these professionals are also an important source for staffing and, as Banai and Harry (2004) argue, international itinerants can offer some advantages to employers that could not be offered by traditional expatriates.
First of all, hiring an international itinerant can reduce cost, thus serving as an alternative to high-cost expatriation. International itinerants may serve as temporary resources: due to their set of relevant personal and professional capabilities they become perfect candidates for specific tasks or projects. These employees are highly self-managed, which implies that they do not need ‘high maintenance’ in terms of direction and control, and often do not expect much training either – all of which leads to decreases in headcount budget. Given the temporary nature of project work, international itinerants may also be more efficient in getting the work done and rather than prolonging the job, as might happen with open-ended expatriate contracts.
Second, unlike traditional expatriates, international itinerants do not need to divide themselves between parent and host organizations, and therefore do not need to satisfy both. The scholars believe that, due to their being temporarily away from and planning to repatriate to the parent organization, traditional expatriates may waver their loyalty to either home or host organization to some extent. By contrast, international itinerants’ loyalty is undivided, and the employing organization will have their full commitment. An international itinerant is also interested in explicitly building this commitment, as his/her career advancement to another organization depends on good results and references from the last employer.
Third, the pay system of international itinerants is quite simple. Specifically, they are paid based on local circumstances for the job to be done ‘now’. Unlike expatriates, there are no dilemmas over home or host country salary levels, let alone the long-term commitment costs of pension, health insurance, adjustment costs and transfer allowances.
In addition, hiring an international itinerant also removes the responsibility over the individual’s career upon completion of an assignment or project. As mentioned before, these professionals are very independent and manage (and expect to manage) their career progression on their own.
Further advantages of itinerants over expatriates lie within their unique expertise. As the researchers (Banai & Harry, 2004; pg.102) note, ‘some of the international itinerants resemble the medieval masons who moved around the cities of Europe building cathedrals’, implying that these professionals may possess some skills and knowledge that can be transferred across cultures and organizations. At times, developing such expertise within an organization is time consuming and expensive. Moreover, by nature of their lifestyle, itinerants embody the source of international, hence diverse, skills and knowledge, which can be sometimes difficult to reach when operating within a local market.
Finally, being an outsider to the hiring organization, the international itinerant is also a better option for carrying out unpopular tasks, such as downsizing or restructuring, than a company’s permanent managers.
Naturally all the aforementioned benefits and conveniences of hiring international itinerants are balanced with some possible disadvantages for employers. First, although an itinerant’s compensation does not include training cost and other usual expatriate benefits, the unique expertise and project-based contract may at times result in higher salary for the international itinerant compared to seconded expatriates or local managers. The most important shortcoming of hiring international itinerant however comes from their lack of knowledge about the company, and visa versa. For example, some assignments and projects depend on the employee’s knowledge of the organizational culture, policies and practices, which means that, in case an international itinerant is hired, some time and money still needs to be allocated to his/her training and integration into the organization. From the other end, a company may have limited familiarity with the international itinerant’s skills and abilities. However, even assigning a familiar employee to a job in the host country does not necessarily ensure assignment success – so staffing risk can never be fully accounted for.
Further reading:
Banai, M. & Harry, W. (2004). Boundaryless Global Careers : The International Itinerants. International Studies of Management and Organization, 34, 3, 96-120.
In order to compete in an international marketplace, Americans must study harder than their counterparts around the world–and do so continually. Whereas members of the European Union are accustomed to working in different languages and across borders, American business tends to be insular; most companies do not take into account the broader perspective of trade regulations of different governing bodies. In addition to language difficulties, cultural differences make international business more challenging, but with the globalization of the world markets, it’s well worth your time and effort to learn multi-cultural business etiquette.