KIPLINGER RECOMMENDS

Home > Business Costs

COMMENT

BUZZ UP

DIGG

CHECK OUT:

EXECUTIVE POLL

Bernard Madoff, convicted of running an $65 billion Ponzi scheme, was sentenced to 150 years in jail. What’s your take on his punishment?

Compare Price Quotes 100+ Services

OUR PREMIUM CONTENT

The Kiplinger Tax Letter
The Kiplinger Agriculture Letter
The Kiplinger California Letter
Kiplinger's Biofuels Market Alert
Kiplinger's Retirement Report

SUBSCRIBER HELP

CURRENT LETTER

By Knight Kiplinger

The Kiplinger Washington Editors

July 2, 2009

By year-end or so, Congress will give the nod to a major rewriting of the nation's financial regulatory system. This week’s Kiplinger Letter explores whether the package will do more harm than good and what lawmakers are likely to include.

ALSO IN THIS ISSUE: The Economy, Business Costs, Taxes, Supreme Court, Energy, Workplace Regulations, Climate Change, Health Care Legislation and Foreign Policy

PREVIOUS ISSUES

CORRECTIONS

TRY THE LETTER:
Subscribe | See Sample

YOUR FEEDBACK

SUBSCRIBERLOG: Got a topic you'd like to discuss? Or a problem or question? Please join our exclusive forum for Letter subscribers only.

ASK US: A Kiplinger Letter editor will promptly answer subscriber questions.

OPEN FORUM: Share your insights and analysis with other visitors.

I just attended a franchise seminar. The speaker represents a few hundred franchises that (he says) are hand picked. He has the prospect (aka victim?) answer some questions about themselves then he makes recomendations - based on your personality, capital situation, etc.. If you pick a franchise, then he does some due dilligence for you. If you both decide it's a good idea, he helps you get started. He says he offers this service free of charge, which means he gets a commission if he's able to sell you a franchise. Has anyone done this? Successfully? Unsuccessfully?

-- fender

Surviving a Downturn Through Outsourcing

Outsourcing in tough times can make it easier to ratchet production up or down without carrying bottom-line-crushing overhead.

Worth Reading: The Quick Take from Kiplinger

November 2008

Vivian L. Hanson

Morrison & Foerster

Vivian L. Hanson is a partner in the Technology Transactions Group in the New York office of Morrison & Foerster LLP. Ms. Hanson has extensive experience in outsourcing, technology transfers, licensing and other intellectual property transactions, as well as in joint ventures, strategic alliances, mergers, acquisitions and general corporate matters.

Gordon Milner

Morrison & Foerster

Gordon Milner is a partner in the firm's China practice. He specializes in providing advice on intellectual property, information technology law and outsourcing. He has advised clients in the technology, financial services, telecommunications and life sciences industries in Asia, Europe and the U.S. on a wide spectrum of technology-related matters.

In less tumultuous times, companies have looked at outsourcing as a way to improve a business: Let an experienced vendor handle and improve particular business tasks so the firm can focus on its core functions. But in a recession, when companies are frantically trying to reduce costs, they turn to outside contractors to save money, pure and simple.

"Today’s outsourcing deals are intensely, singularly concerned with reducing head count and saving money -- the sooner, the better," write Morrison & Foerster attorneys Vivian Hanson and Gordon Milner. "In an environment where Fortune 500 companies have disappeared overnight, a successfully executed outsourcing deal could make a difference in a company’s ability to ride out these challenging times."

The authors point out that the cost cutting allure of outsourcing goes beyond the likely lower wages to be found overseas. Instead of carrying their own fixed costs, companies can rely on a contractor to produce what they need on a far more flexible and efficient basis. "Variable pricing based upon usage enables companies to reduce expenditures when ... demand for their own goods and services decreases," they write. "Conversely, as demand increases, external vendors are typically better equipped to increase provision of outsourced services, thereby enabling companies to meet fluctuations in the marketplace without consistently carrying bloated overhead costs."

Hanson and Milner explain how to ensure that the contracts worked out with vendors actually provide the flexibility a company is seeking. They also explain some of the ins and outs of hiring vendors in two of the most sought after countries for outsourcing -- India and China. For example, they suggest including arbitration clauses to resolve disputes. Judgments made in U.S. courts are not enforceable in either country, but India and China are both signatories to global agreements that do require honoring decisions handed down by arbitrators.

READER COMMENTS

Post a comment

Hide comment form

Read all comments (5)

Read recent comments

POSTED BY: katie (November 19, 2008 10:53 AM)
Outsourcing may be great for companies for the short-term but in the long-term it will only hurt the U.S.A. and the companies, because without jobs our county will fall. Greed has caused all of our problems. .companies' greed for more and more profits(Outsourcing at the expense of their workers) .Unions making unreasonable demands .Bankers' greed for large profits(making loans knowing that the payments could not be meet for long) .People getting loans that would not be able to pay (greed) Without jobs we will never get out of this problem. No job = no purchases. Companies need to ask the question, will China and India be able to keep them in business. Therefore outsouring will only continue to create problems We need to keep America working!!

POSTED BY: k.s. (November 19, 2008 02:28 PM)
Personally, I think that companies would fare better in this economy if consumers actually had money - companies are losing customers and potential customers by sending jobs, and, therefore, money, overseas. Are Indian and Chinese citizens going to spend their paychecks in the American market? No. That money could be going to a qualified worker in the US, where it would reenter our own market. By outsourcing, companies are actually removing billions of potential dollars from our economy, and it WILL end up hurting them.

POSTED BY: Philip (December 01, 2008 10:58 PM)
Outsourcing isn't about shipping jobs overseas, it is about sourcing the best available labor at the best rate -- exactly like how consumers comparison shop to get the best price on an item. Stopping outsourcing is basically removing US from the global competitive market. Higher valued jobs are created as a result of lower skilled jobs being outsourced. If you find your current job being offshored, then it's time to pick up another skill.

POSTED BY: Steve Morrison (January 23, 2009 03:08 PM)
One way to stimulate the economy is to let companies spend more on creative activities and source out the monotonous work to low-cost suppliers (US or India or China). US is the biggest economy by far in GDP, yet one of the least efficient. Hence it's quickly losing its status at the top. Staying on top of the game and thinking smart is only best for us. Its time to throw old-fashioned ideas (anti-outsourcing) out of the door.

POSTED BY: Rich Ramos (January 26, 2009 05:44 PM)
Philip and Steve Morrison sound like the CEOs who are outsourcing our jobs. I'm a highly skilled engineer with lots of experience. Nothing monotonous or uncreative in my work. Yet these jobs are being shipped out for one reason: cheap labor. Pure and simple. The USA will soon be left with CEOs, financiers, and cashiers. These guys are always crying about a shortage of qualified labor and are overburdened by high taxes. Singing the same song as we drive into the ditch.

MORE: Kiplinger Recommends | Business Costs

TOOLS: