Explore the vast range of titles available.

PurposeThis study investigates the impact of geopolitical disruptions on the manufacturing supply chain (SC) location decision of managers in UK multinational firms. The context of study is the UK manufacturing sector and its response to the UK's decision to leave the European Union (EU), or Brexit.Design/methodology/approachThe study adopts an abductive, theory elaboration approach and expands on Dunning's eclectic paradigm of international production. A Delphi study over four iterative rounds is conducted to gather and assess insights into manufacturing SC location issues related to Brexit. The panel consisted of 30 experts and managers from a range of key industries, consultancies, governmental organisations, and academia. The Delphi findings are triangulated using a focus group with 38 participants.FindingsThe findings indicate that the majority of companies planned or have relocated production facilities from the UK to the EU, and distribution centres (DCs) from the EU to the UK. This was because of market-seeking advantages (being close to major centres of demand, ease of access to local and international markets) and efficiency-seeking advantages (costs related to expected delays at ports, tariff and non-tariff barriers). Ownership and internalisation advantages, also suggested by the eclectic paradigm, did not play a role in the location decision.Originality/valueThe study elaborates on the OLI framework by showing that policy-related uncertainty is a primary influencing factor in the manufacturing location decision, outweighing the importance of uncertainty as an influencer of governance mode choices. The authors find that during geopolitical disruptions managers make location decisions in tight time-frames with incomplete and imperfect information, in situations of high perceived uncertainty. The study elaborates on the eclectic paradigm by explaining how managerial cognition and bounded rationality influence the manufacturing location decision-making process.

Purpose: The aim of this paper is to analyze and classify research that has been conducted on manufacturing reshoring, i.e. the decision to bring back to the home country production activities earlier offshored, independently of the governance mode (insourcing vs outsourcing). Consequently, the paper also aims at providing avenues for future research and to highlight the distinct value of studying manufacturing reshoring either per se or in combination with other constructs of the international business tradition. Design/methodology/approach: A set of 57 carefully selected articles on manufacturing reshoring published in international journals or books indexed on Scopus in the past 10 years was systematically analyzed based on the “5Ws and 1H” (who-what-where-when-why and how) set of questions. Findings: The authors’ work shows a certain convergence among authors regarding what reshoring is and what its key features and motivations are. In contrast, other related aspects, such as the decision-making and implementation processes, are comparatively less understood. Research limitations/implications: As manufacturing reshoring is a “recent” topic, for some of its aspects, only exploratory research is available to date, limiting the authors’ possibility to either characterize it in a more exhaustive way or highlight well-established patterns. Practical implications: The paper demonstrates that studying reshoring will indeed contribute to expanding our understanding of internationalization processes and strategies in general and of production internationalization specifically. While past studies have argued that the learning derived from international experience would permit firms to overcome their unfamiliarity with new business environments, reshoring might show that this outcome is not necessarily certain. Rather, firms might not be able to overcome obstacles because of internationalization or they might realize that attempting to do so is not desirable, e.g. because of excessive risk or changes in the firm’s strategic priorities. Social implications: From a societal point of view, the present research underlines that reshoring can be part of that re-industrialization policy that many Western countries include in their economic agenda – yet, its impact on employment should not be overestimated, as often relocation is only in regard to some product lines. At the same time, there might be an intimate relationship between reshoring and the various forms of technological innovations applied to manufacturing – which has become popularly labeled as “Industry 4.0”. Originality/value: Literature reviews proposed until now usually paid almost exclusive attention to motivations driving this phenomenon. This paper offers a broader and more comprehensive examination of the extant knowledge of manufacturing reshoring and identifies the main unresolved issues and knowledge gaps, which future research should investigate.

This paper empirically studies determinants of decision by companies to offshore innovation activities. It uses survey data from the international Offshoring Research Network project to estimate the impact of managerial intentionality, past experience, and environmental factors on the probability of offshoring innovation projects. The results show that the emerging shortage of highly skilled science and engineering talent in the US and, more generally, the need to access qualified personnel are important explanatory factors for offshoring innovation decisions. Moreover, contrary to drivers of many other functions, labor arbitrage is less important than other forms of cost savings. The paper concludes with a discussion of the changing dynamics underlying offshoring of innovation activities, suggesting that companies are entering a global race for talent.

We examine the impact of Chinese import competition on broad measures of technical change—patenting, IT, and TFP—using new panel data across twelve European countries from 1996 to 2007. In particular, we establish that the absolute volume of innovation increases within the firms most affected by Chinese imports in their output markets. We correct for endogeneity using the removal of product-specific quotas following China's entry into the World Trade Organization in 2001. Chinese import competition led to increased technical change within firms and reallocated employment between firms towards more technologically advanced firms. These within and between effects were about equal in magnitude, and account for 14% of European technology upgrading over 2000-7 (and even more when we allow for offshoring to China). Rising Chinese import competition also led to falls in employment and the share of unskilled workers. In contrast to low-wage nations like China, developed countries had no significant effect on innovation.

This paper documents the pervasiveness of job polarization in 16 Western European countries over the period 1993-2010. It then develops and estimates a framework to explain job polarization using routine-biased technological change and offshoring. This model can explain much of both total job polarization and the split into within-industry and between-industry components.

Purpose Reshoring is one of the supply chain risk management techniques suggested in literature. However, literature suggests that the decision-making involved in reshoring is complex and not fully understood. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, reshoring may represent a way to reduce reliance on global sources and improve resilience of their supply chains. This paper aims to explore if the pandemic is driving reshoring decisions and if the pandemic will actually lead to companies reshoring parts of their supply chain. Design/methodology/approach This paper critically engages with senior(-most) supply chain managers from three manufacturing companies as they proceed through reshoring decision-making. This enables to develop experiential knowledge about reshoring decision-making processes and their context, as well as insights into the relevance of existing knowledge about reshoring. While not a full multiple case study, the opportunity to engage directly with senior(-most) supply chain managers as they consider reshoring, enables near real-time learning. Not only is reshoring a very timely topic literature has also called for more event-based empirical research. Further to that, it is hoped that this can complement this special issue and support, in a timely manner, the many researchers that are actively studying the impact of the pandemic on supply chains. Findings Reshoring was being actively considered by all three companies during the research process in Q3 and Q4 of 2020. During this period the pandemic has not yet led to substantial implementation of reshoring, at least by the companies studied in this paper. In response to tariffs on Chinese imports, companies had been diversifying their supply base away from China, but doing so by developing alternative, global sources. Additionally, companies are using alternative risk management techniques, such as supplier collaboration, in the short to medium term. Reshoring decision-making is indeed found to be complex and requires a longer-term time horizon for decision-making and implementation. Logistical challenges and growth in demand do drive a willingness of consumers to pay a premium for locally sourced products. However, when supply normalizes these considerations might lose relevance well before reshoring decision-making and implementation can be completed. Originality/value This paper studies reshoring in a real-world setting, learning directly from insights from industry as they emerge. This paper develops four extensions to existing knowledge, develop these in frameworks and hope that this will support ongoing consideration in industry and support the many researchers that are active in this domain today. This paper also suggests several directions for further research.

The offshoring of knowledge services has become a phenomenon of increasing importance for firms, but many of its implications are yet to be discussed thoroughly. This paper analyzes whether R&D offshoring contributes to enhancing firms' innovation capabilities. Specifically, the study distinguishes between two governance models of offshoring - captive offshoring and offshore outsourcing - and two types of innovation outcomes - product and process innovations. We suggest that R&D offshoring has different impacts, depending on the innovation results and governance models considered. The study empirically tests these relationships using the Spanish Technological Innovation Panel. This survey contains information on a large sample of firms from diverse sectors for the period 2004-2007. The empirical findings allow us confirm our hypotheses, and highlight the strategic importance of R&D offshoring. The empirical evidence reveals a positive relation between offshoring and innovation performance, with a greater effect on product than on process innovations. The results for different governance models show that captive offshoring has a greater effect on innovation outcomes than offshore outsourcing. These findings lead us to conclude that firms that look overseas can benefit from location-specific and specialization advantages to improve innovation performance.

This paper examines the role of offshoring in the flattening of the ratio of female to male hours worked in the US since the early 1990s. The observed flattening coincides with a decline in the share of occupations with high offshoring potential in women’s hours worked and an increase in service offshoring. I propose a two-gender, two-sector model with a continuum of occupations. Given the higher female intensity in the service sector, the gender hours ratio declines as service offshoring increases. Quantitatively, the service offshoring plays an important role in explaining the plateau in the gender hours ratio since the 1990s.

Agency theory has served as a key basis for identifying drivers of offshore information system project success. Consequently, the role of relational factors in driving project success has been overlooked in this literature. In this paper, we address this gap by integrating the social embeddedness perspective and the culture literature to theorize how and why relational factors affect the success of offshore IS projects that are strategic in nature. We identify organizational and interpersonal cultural differences as critical success factors in this context. Using data from a longitudinal field study of 155 offshore IS projects managed by 22 project leaders, we found evidence of a relationship between hypothesized relational factors and two measures of offshore IS project success—namely, project cost overruns and client satisfaction—over and above the effects of project characteristics and agency factors. Specifically, we found that information exchange, joint problem solving, and trust reduce project cost overruns and improve client satisfaction. We also found a relationship between cultural differences at the organizational and team level, and offshore IS project success. The model explained 40 percent and 41 percent of the variance in project cost overruns and client satisfaction, respectively, for projects with a client representative. For projects with no client representative, the model explained 35 percent and 37 percent of the variance in project cost overruns and client satisfaction, respectively. Collectively, the results have important theoretical and practical implications for how client—vendor relationships should be managed when partnering with offshore firms and designing offshore IS project teams.

Research summary: We examine the role of firm strategy in the global effort to combat pollution. We find that U.S. plants release less toxic emissions when their parent firm imports more from low‐wage countries (LWCs). Consistent with the Pollution Haven Hypothesis, goods imported by U.S. firms from LWCs are in more pollution‐intensive industries. U.S. plants shift production to less pollution‐intensive industries, produce less waste, and spend less on pollution abatement when their parent imports more from LWCs. The negative impact of LWC imports on emissions is stronger for U.S. plants located in counties with greater institutional pressure for environmental performance, but weaker for more‐capable U.S. plants and firms. These results highlight the role of local institutions and firm capability in explaining firms' offshoring and environmental strategies. Managerial summary: Using confidential trade, production, and pollution data of more than 8,000 firms and 18,000 plants from the U.S. Census Bureau for years 1992–2009, we find that U.S. plants release less toxic emissions when their parent firm imports more from low‐wage countries (LWCs). In addition, goods imported by U.S. firms from LWCs are in more pollution‐intensive industries. U.S. plants shift production to less pollution‐intensive industries, produce less waste, and spend less on pollution abatement when their parent imports more from LWCs. However, not all U.S. firms choose to “offshore pollution.” U.S. plants located in counties with greater institutional pressure for environmental performance offshore more, but more‐capable U.S. plants and firms offshore less. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.