We have to keep in mind the selection process of expats when sending them overseas. The best practice is to get the right person sent, and this means having someone that wants to go. Too many companies in the United States have qualified people that want to live and work overseas for a variety of reasons. Instead of tapping someone that does not necessarily want to go, or wants a short-term engagaement, they need to utilize the resources they have and send qualified individuals overseas who want to be there. From my perspective, the attraction of a global company is the ability for me to live and work in other markets, especially emerging markets. Without this feature, you are only left with opportunities to work in your own country which only adds to the loss of insight into the rest of the world markets but offers no real ability to add to the global concept.

The reverse-expat phenomenon will only be possible in some companies and locations. Case in point is a country like Vietnam: while there are some examples of reverse expats, it is a very small fraction of the total expat population employed here. To have more local managers, there are many other aspects that need to be factored in.

There are many implications for the international aid sector here, too.

One of the major issues any company faces while outsourcing is the transfer of knowledge. Sending expats to emerging markets, or vice-versa, is a secondary issue. Finding local talent is also secondary. The main issue is: does the company have a robust knowledge management system in place to transfer its process knowledge to an outsourcing location?

One prescription does not fit all ills. If you take the view that all crossing of cultural borders has its risks, even with a reverse-expat strategy, you should set the time and goals, involve both local and global stakeholders in the decision, and make sure the expat is culturally adept—not just aware. When you “mix and match” to accommodate different circumstances, just understand the limitations and work with them as best as you can. Cultural misunderstanding can be a full-time preoccupation, so be prepared to set expectations around the clock.

I’ve worked with or have been in contact with several companies that have “universities” for select local management trainees, following the same steps indicated by Mr. Joerres. They spend a year or more working in different functional roles at other company sites alongside experienced managers. Eventually they are assigned an associate general manager or director role in a country other than their own, then move back to their own countries to manage. Very successful!

Nothing generates distrust and resentment more than top-loading country staff with expats. Insult is added to injury when major decisions are taken without soliciting opinions or ideas from local middle managers and technical staff, further reinforcing the concept that locals are just the “natives.”

Will mistakes be made? Will stuff need to be “fixed?” Of course, but less so if local management is not just tossed into the deep end of the pool. Good mentoring, a “blameless” corporate culture that tolerates mistakes as part of the learning process, and good support from expat experts, counterparts, and technical advisors all help local managers towards the level of competence expected.

This is a very interesting and useful article for corporate heads to consider in the near future when planning their HR strategies. However, what would be even more useful is to look into the not-for-profit industry of education, where the recruiting of expatriate educators conflicts directly with the need to develop local educational talent, but where parents’ perceptions are paramount to the success of these educational institutions. How can the ideas suggested in this article be applied to the education industry?

It is very clear that Mr. Joerres has not worked in China, India, or other markets. It is easy to say that you do not need expats, but I have worked with companies that have cut costs by taking out expats, only to send them back to fix the mess and put things back in order. It can take 15 to 25 years to transfer things over to the locals if you are lucky enough to find good local talent. And when and if you find them, it takes a great deal of time and training to ensure they are ready to take on the duties. Even after that, you still need to support these local managers with a leaner expat team.

While much of the argument presented here may ring true, it is important to be aware of some issues that are easier for an expatriate manager to handle compared with a local manager, regardless of how much reverse-expatriating has taken place.

First, local employees are much more susceptible to local pressures from suppliers and customers. It is easier for an expat to stick to a signed contract, even under pressure to amend it, than it is for a local manager, since non-business aspects are more easily brought to bear on a local employee.

Second, a local manager may—regardless of the key performance indicators being used to measure him or her—focus more on what is good for his or her country than what is good for his or her company, unwittingly or not. Currying political favors and goodwill are typically the drivers behind this kind of behavior. Especially in emerging markets, this is a risk that is effectively mitigated by using an expatriate manager.

These two issues need to be addressed clearly and openly when discussing whether or not to localize a given position, as both represent risks that must be and can be mitigated from an ownership perspective.

After my graduation in France and some good work experience in France, Brussels, Geneva, and London, I decided to come back to Gabon (in Central Africa). The challenge was to become “the expert” in my field. What I sell to Western companies with a subsidiary in my country is my strong knowledge of the local culture, the rough business environment, and the Western corporate and management culture. A local leader does not fear to go inland or to walk in the streets. He knows what local workers want and how to deal with them. He is ready since day 1 and does not need to take a return ticket bought by the company twice a year. In my case, I worked in Europe so I also know what Western shareholders want, and can understand the corporate strategy and then implement it locally. I think that hiring, training, and coaching local leaders is the best investment a global company can make.

This vision is already outdated. Look at Nestle, where managers—wherever they come from—can head whatever market, region, or strategic business unit. There are no more expats or reverse expats among these senior managers, only world citizens who have multilingual and multicultural experiences, and a family and education background. Therefore, the potential of so-called “local talents in emerging markets” is not capped at the country- or even the continent-level. The sky is the limit...maybe.

Execution excellence calls for a uniform professional culture across national boundaries. Besides, countries such as India are so culturally diverse that citizens may have only shallow insights into how segments of their home countries think, feel, choose, decide, and act. I favor expatriates, though not necessarily only from the developed world to emerging markets. Domestic advertising agencies, universities, vendors, and consultants can provide quality local flavors to management processes.

Multinationals and global companies have ventured outside their home countries for many years now, since the days of the East and West India Companies. The Americans came in big waves to Europe, Asia, and Africa in recent modern business history.

So one would have thought the many bright leaders leading these world-leading corporations would have gotten this tiny detail of grooming local talents by expensive (or value-for-money) expat managers down to a simple, standard routine by now.

Yet, we keep learning about how some expat managers created more damage than good when they came and left. Yet, we are hearing the need for a reverse-expat strategy to develop local managerial and leadership talents and to grow the local market in a mutually beneficial and sustainable manner.

As an expat manager with a then-world&8217ls most admired American company in China in the mid-1990s, I would like to share how growing local managerial and leadership talents can work:

1. the reverse-expat strategy must be part of a bigger, integrated and holistic approach;

2. the company must believe that the local market is best left to local talents to manage and grow in-line with the company’s beliefs and values;

3. the company must believe that the expats are there for a short period of time with one very specific, smart goal: developing the local talents to take over for himself or herself;

4. if that very specific, smart goal is not met within the expat’s assignment period, the incoming expat must include this very specific, smart goal in his or her key performance indicators; it cannot be left to chance. How often have we seen short-term-assignment expats come in to fix short-term problems and then get that promotion to a bigger stage without regards to some of the longer-term damages that were created;

5. the expat must have the confidence and integrity to groom the local talents who will take over his or her place in due course. When I was in China, I used to tell some of my best people that China belongs to them and I may even work for them one day! Some are now very successful leaders in HP China and Accenture China;

6. equip the expat managers and leaders with effective coaching skills: talk less, listen more, and ask more powerful questions to understand, analyze, and involve others to generate viable solutions, and follow through honestly and with integrity.

The reverse-expat strategy is definitely part of the overall successful planning.

AS an expat myself, I believe in the concept of the reverse expat if and only if we can have access to well prepared and trained professionals in the native countries. That won’t be true in many emerging countries, as it happens in Africa, and as I’m sure most expats fail to adapt and therefore communicate in their destination countries.

To me, however, more important than knowing that expats fail is to know why they fail. As I usually put it in managers’ meetings, every day they send expats who are younger and more unprepared, although technically appropriate. Obviously moving someone from Atlanta, USA, to Somewhere, India, without previous experiences in less “aggressive” and culturally diverse countries will not be a good idea, although it is a recurrent practice. It would be a good idea to roll out what's expected of him or her as an expat, as happens with good HR career management practices. Good management in this global economy is not only the achievement of financial results; it’s the “how to” of achieving those results successfully in a diverse, cross-cultural environment. As for myself, an social anthropologist graduate that became a manager, I have achieved more results, faster and better, than a conventional, traditional manager and business-school graduate because, as explained in the article, I understand to where and to whom we need to adapt in order to achieve the results expected in Somewhere, India, by those seated behind the desks in Atlanta, USA.

I love the TV show Outsourced. Todd is a great manager regardless whether he is an expat or not. In the TV show, he shows far superior judgment, management capability, and even cultural sensitivities than his local counterpart, Rajiv. And therein lies the problem. I ran a services unit in India and Ukraine. Unfortunately, in the job market we found more Rajiv personalities and less of Todd-like managers. What worked for us was finding local expats—folks who had spent some time (two to four years) in the Western world and were looking to permanently settle back in India and Ukraine. They seemed to get both sides of the equation.

Interestingly, there remains an expat bias among management in the United States. My company provides advice to business process outsourcing and call center companies, and we have heard multiple times that call center X is well run because we are lucky enough to have an expat installed in that center. Until US-based management becomes comfortable with the idea of local talent as leadership, this is unlikely to change.

Excellent piece. I have seen companies like Lever (Hindustan Lever in India) excel at developing local talent. In high tech (except in sales), multinational corporations tend to think centrally, hence they are not able to exploit or develop the local talent. My belief is that high-tech companies lag here.

Great article. I’ve seen many expat managers in my country (from the car-manufacturer’s industry, acting as C-suite members of the local distributors) adapting rapidly to the bribing habit but not to the good aspects of the local culture, like pride and goodwill. Furthermore, they applied mass-marketing techniques, spending millions of euros without taking into consideration the fact that 40 percent of the population lives in small cities (more like villages) where word of mouth is far stronger than any advertisement.