-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Politech] IEEE's relatively protectionst views on offshoring Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 12:37:05 -0500 From: Steven Cherry <s.cherry@private> To: Declan McCullagh <declan@private> References: <405A99EF.8060907@private> Declan, your subject line prompts me to note that the IEEE-USA is one organization within the IEEE. More than half, but fewer than two-thirds of all IEEE members are located in the U.S. The long-term trend is a faster increase in non-North American membership. That said, I'm not sure how fair it is to call IEEE-USA's position "protectionist." They're concerned with the huge and rather sudden jump in electrical engineering unemployment, all out of synch with the economy as a whole. When EE unemployment is significantly bigger than the national average, despite historically being half as large or even less, something troubling is going on. Increased outsourcing is one concern, there are plenty of others. Steven -- -- Steven Cherry, +1 212-419-7566 Senior Associate Editor IEEE Spectrum, 3 Park Ave, New York, NY 10016 <s.cherry@private> <http://www.spectrum.ieee.org> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Politech] IEEE's relatively protectionst views on offshoring Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 14:45:42 +0530 From: Suresh Ramasubramanian <suresh@private> Organization: -ENOENT To: Declan McCullagh <declan@private> References: <405A99EF.8060907@private> Declan McCullagh writes on 3/19/2004 12:27 PM: > > > WASHINGTON, March 18 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Offshoring contributes to high > unemployment levels among U.S. technologists, and poses a serious, Just a question - which may or may not be dumb. Is this the stated opinion of the IEEE, or that of the US chapter of IEEE? And does the US chpater of IEEE speak for itself, or for the worldwide membership of IEEE? I do believe that the IEEE is quite active in India and elsewhere (at least I know of a whole bunch of Indians, based in India, who have @ieee.org addresses) I don't imagine that the global IEEE membership really shares this opinion, but well, not being an IEEE member at all I could well be wrong Never mind me, I'm just a bit pedantic on the difference between the US chapter (however large it may be) of a worldwide org, and the worldwide org itself ... srs -------- Original Message -------- Subject: IEEE-USA release not really protectionist Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 17:30:44 -0800 From: Jeff Gruszynski <jgruszynski@private> To: declan@private In the fine print of the new release it says "IEEE-USA", that is, the USA chapter of the international organization. I don't see how this is "protectionist" simply because they take on a legitimately national issue. I'd expect the IEEE-UK or IEEE-China to do the same. Pretty much all the IEEE-USA points are exactly correct, from a national USA perspective. Outsourcing *does* put at risk the US's historic ability to lead most technology development and innovation. It could come to pass that being an "Engineer" in the US may become as rare as being a "Service Station Attendant" or a "Stenographer". I'm not saying that protectionism is even an option, but competitiveness is certainly a requirement at the national level. That means wanting to have something that other countries don't have, which is differentiation, not protectionism. J Gruszynski -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Politech] IEEE-USA has the right approach on offshoring REMOVEEMAIL Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 03:39:09 +1100 From: Tony Healy <thealy@private> To: Declan McCullagh <declan@private> Hi Declan Miguel Helft quotes a particular case in support of offshoring. Here are some cases with different outcomes. Santa Clara based Ishoni Networks, valued at $200 million and with $68 million from VC's, went broke after sending its development work to India. [1] Quakertown, Pa based AM Communications entered an outsourcing deal with an Indian firm and effectively lost its intellectual property, deterring investors later on. [2] Fitness chain Life Time Fitness found that a software project outsourced to a supposed leader in India was delivered with screens not working and that most of the outsourcer's developers had only a year or two's experience. [3] Lehman Brothers and Dell have returned offshored services to America, and so has retailer Coles Myer in Australia. [4][5][6] Several offshoring spruikers have changed their tune after gaining real world experience. They include Ravi Chiruvolu, a partner at Charter Venture Capital, and Business Week marketing columnist Christopher Kenton, who were both boosting offshoring in early 2003. By December 2003, Chirovulu was explaining to a reporter that Indian middlemen gouge foreign corporations up to 10 times the fees they charge local (Indian) companies. [1] By January this year, Kenton was writing of unexpected hidden costs from not having developers under the same roof. Kenton also warns of the difficulty in protecting intellectual property and enforcing contracts. [7] VC's are pushing it ------------------- Matloff has previously commented on the surprising propensity for venture capital firms to demand offshoring from investees. This was most striking in the case of Google, which has world class R&D team in the US, and would not seem to need any offshoring. Nevertheless, that's what they did as preparation for their IPO. Almost all business plans nowadays include offshoring, according to a VC executive quoted in the San Francisco Chronicle. [8] The company described in Migquel Helft's column, Tasman Networks, is in fact a heavy VC play, backed by Mayfield, Bowman, Worldcom and others. [9] In conclusion, offshoring covers several different issues including economic externalities and is too complex an issue to leave to business management. 1. Matt Marshall: Offshore labor drove firm to brink, Mercury News, 08 Jan 2004 http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/business/7659988.htm 2. David Gumpert: Growing Concerns, Business Week, 03 Mar 2004 http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/content/mar2004/sb2004033_0420.htm 3. Wesley Bertch: How Offshore Outsourcing Failed Us, Network Computing, 16 Oct 2003 http://www.nwc.com/shared/article/printFullArticle.jhtml?articleID=15201900 4. Lehman Brothers stops outsourcing IT help desk from India, Hindustan Times, 16 Dec 2003 http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_497389,0003.htm 5. Ed Frauenheim : Dell drops some tech calls to India, CNet, 24 Nov 2003 http://news.com.com/2100-7342-5110933.html?tag=nl 6. John G. Spooner: Growing pains hit Dell's customer service, CNet, 20 Feb 2004 http://news.com.com/2100-1042_3-5162141.html?tag=nefd_lede 7. Christopher Kenton: The Changing Face of Offshore Programming, Business Week Magazine, 05 Jan 2004 http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/content/dec2003/sb20031231_3576.htm 8. John Shinal: VC firms push for outsourcing, San Francisco Chronicle, 07 Mar 2004 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/03/07/BUGGI5ENK31.DTL 9. Tasman Networks investors http://www.tasmannetworks.com/aboutinvestors.html Regards, Tony Healy Australia _______________________________________________ Politech mailing list Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Mar 23 2004 - 22:04:38 PST