Can someone help provide a feedback for this discussion post below. it is a glob

Question

Can someone help provide a feedback for this discussion post below. it is a global business course

Our text provided interesting information on offshoring vs not offshoring. Basically, companies that go offshore or outsource labor or service to a foreign country do so because they can save money. They save on labor costs primarily. They also may need to seek a skilled labor pool.

The critics for offshoring argue that jobs are lost in the home country, and companies are ignoring their social responsibilities. The other big argument is that when companies offshore they lose or put at risk their innovative technology and trade secrets. These host affiliate companies catch on quickly and start profiting from the new technology. Many times, companies have broken away and become the home countries biggest competitor. The RCA example was a very compelling argument for not offshoring.

This Silicone border operation in Mexicali when completed and completely built out, will be an interesting experiment to watch. They are banking on being so close to Northern California’s Silicon Valley. They will be able to capitalize because of proximity on the border, the resources available currently supplying Silicon Valley. The Silicon border could hire away labor talent from up north. Provide excellent weather and close proximity to the fabulous metropolitan city of San Diego. This seems to be a smart move for Mexico.

I took it out. I just need a feedback for this post above. the topic is as below

Nearshoring and Silicon Border

Based on your reading and current events on the topic, research and debate with your fellow peers your opinions of the subject.

Discuss the developments of the Silicon Border and the merits of nearshoring as compared to offshore and outsourcing.

What do you think about the debate in the text that addresses, “Offshoring Verses Not Offshoring” (pg. 110)?

Explanation / Answer

My opinion on the subject is that off-shoring is a very good thing from a long term perspectives and the benefits of off-shoring far outweighs the costs associated with off-shoring in the long run. First of all companies usually off-shore and outsource their non-core activities. This leads to improved competitiveness for the company as it is able to not only rationalize its costs but is able to focus on its core business. Cost rationalization also enables these companies to plough back its savings to make its core operations stronger. Secondly off-shoring is a win-win game for everyone in the long run. While jobs are lost in the short run in the home country in the medium and long term as the company becomes more competitive it is able to add more jobs in its core operations. Thus it helps in redeployment of labor.

The Silicone border operation in Mexicali is a reality that reflects the current off-shoring position among companies and economies in the world. The operation will help in providing a strategic alternative for semi –conductor operations in North America and the operations will be cost-effective as well as centralized.

Near-shoring holds several advantages over off-shoring and outsourcing as a model. There are advantages of geographical proximity, speed to market and lower costs. While benefits of lower costs are available in the off-shoring and outsourcing models these models do not provide the benefits of geographical proximity and speed to market.

The debate with regards to “Offshoring Verses Not Offshoring” is an interesting debate where the pros and cons of each model is discussed. On the basis of facts and arguments provided in the debate I agin rest my case that off-shoring is a very good thing from a long term perspectives and the benefits of off-shoring far outweighs the costs associated with off-shoring in the long run.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse C
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.