Yves Smith wrote on her naked capitalism blog:
… … The claim that outsourcing and off-shoring lower costs is greatly exaggerated.
Off-shoring and outsourcing … … do lower direct factor and lower-level worker costs.
But they do so at the increase of greater coordination costs of much more highly-paid managers. And they also increase shipping and financing costs, and downside risk.
Having people work at a distance, whether managerially or by virtue of being in an outside organization where the relationship is governed by contract, increases rigidity (harder to respond to changes in market demand) and the odds of screw-ups due to communication lapses.
And outsourcing also reduces an organization’s skills. Those lower-level people have a lot of product know-how that you lose when you transfer activities to an outside operation.
It’s nice to think that you can hollow out your organization and just do all the sexy design and marketing stuff and dump the grunt work on other players. But over time you are breeding future competitors.
Thus off-shoring is best understood as a device for transferring income from the rank and file to middle level and senior executives.
via naked capitalism.
In short, off-shoring lowers the wages of production workers, and raises the salaries and importance of managers. And who makes the decision about off-shoring? The managers!
This reminds me of America by Design and Forces of Production, books I read by an economic historian named David Noble. He wrote that there was no evidence of an overall economic benefit in replacing skilled workers with automatic machinery. The benefit was in increasing the power of managers and industrial engineers, and decreasing the power of workers.
There’s something called public choice theory, which is about how public officials, when making decisions, consider their own good as well as the public good. I’d say this theory applies just as much to decisions within corporations or any other organization.
What it means is that when corporate officials say “the market” determines this or that, we the people are entitled to ask—the market for what and for whom?