Mobility Planning

Some companies have very sophisticated well-thought-through global mobility programs that have been tried and tested for many years. Others are stepping into the global arena for the first time. Either way it doesn’t hurt to check the health of your global mobility program and consider what I would believe to be the 10 best practices to ensure your global relocation program is a successful one.

10 Best Practices to Ensure a Successful Global Relocation

1. Policy
   1. Make sure you have a formal global policy in place that has been reviewed by your global relocation provider for competitiveness and efficiency and bench-marked against industry standards.Candidate Selection 
2. Candidate Selection
   1. Utilize pre-decision surveys or interviews to ensure that your candidate is flexible, adaptable and ready to take on the challenge of an international assignment.
3. Benchmark
   1. Keep up-to-date as situations change, trends develop, and new products come to market.
4. Cost Estimates
   1. In today’s economic environment it’s prudent to have a cost estimate completed before sending someone on an assignment so you have an idea how much it is going to cost.
5. Cost Analysis
   1. Know what you’re spending and what policy changes or exceptions are costing or saving money. There are many examples of companies focusing on elements that are inexpensive and denying them, while allowing exceptions for other elements that are very expensive.
6. Track Exceptions
   1. Be sure to always track any policy exception that was made or declined and the cost of that exception. This will help you be consistent in how you treat other exception requests in the future.
7. Use Proven Providers
   1. Proven providers can give you good advice on all elements of a global relocation and can make the process easier for you.
8. Don’t Cut Corners to Reduce Costs
   1. There is usually a good reason to do something well.
9. Create a Repatriation and Reintegration Plan Well Before the Assignment Ends!
   1. If you don’t, you may risk losing a valuable employee. Statistics show that up to 70 percent of repatriated assignees leave their employer within two years, usually to join a competitor.

For more information on the above global mobility program components and services, please contact SIRVA Relocation for a consultation.

 

In the article Global Mobile Talent—Retention on the Move, published in the August issue of MOBILITY, Silvia Molnar addresses not only the importance of nurturing globally experienced talent in an increasingly global economy but the issue of retaining this talent. Molnar, a client partner at MSI Mobility, begins the article stating that “talent has been declared scarce and, once acquired, increasingly difficult to keep engaged and retained.”

Molnar explains the dilemma: expatriate experience is a critical step in the development of a leader; however sending an individual abroad requires a significant long term investment and increases the risk of loss.

She then introduces six fundamentals of retention that can be used as a guide for increasing your return on talent investment. Molnar stresses investing time for clarification and planning in the beginning of the expatriation process will enable you to build relationships with your future leaders and will return greater dividends in the end. Read more..

Over the past few years, a trend has developed with regards to the localization of expatriates. An increasing number of organizations are either adding localization as a new element to their global mobility program or expanding on existing policy and practices—the main driver of this trend is cost containment.

As a refresher—localization is the process when an employee is moved off of the expatriate package and integrated into the host country on local terms of employment.

What Triggers Localization
Localization is usually triggered by a pre-defined limit to assignment length, most commonly three to five years. It is best to proactively address this threshold either in a global assignment policy and/or in the expatriate’s letter of assignment. By communicating a location policy early on in the assignment process, an organization can reduce unplanned or ad-hoc localizations, reduce expatriate demands and negotiations, and reduce the overall “shock” factor to employees.

What Approach to Take
There are a few different approaches to recognize when managing localizations. The first and most common approach is a straight localization, which entails immediately eliminating all expatriate benefits, e.g. housing, COLA, home leave, etc., on the effective date of localization. To execute a straight localization, it is important that the organization has a clearly defined localization process, and re-communicates the process and policy to the expatriate as early as possible. Not surprisingly, moving from a full benefit package to no additional assistance can cause great strain on the employee, especially if they have family accompanying them on the assignment.

The second approach is to phase out the expatriate package over a pre-determined length of time. The transition over to a “local” package can take anywhere from six months to two years. For example, many companies continue to pay a reduced housing allowance for six to twelve months after the effective date of localization. Other provisions that tend to be phased out in exceptional cases include education assistance and home leave.

Another approach is the lump sum approach. This involves the expatriate immediately transferring to local employment. A lump sum payment, however, is offered to the employee to alleviate some of the financial strain of localization. The lump sum can be used to cover education costs of children, assist with home finding and purchase, or to ship household goods from the home country. A lump sum approach is ideal for organizations that like to remain flexible and give their employees the freedom to decide how they want to utilize the localization assistance.

When localizing an expatriate, there are several compensation items that need to be considered. Here is a checklist to use a guideline:

1. Base salary. Should the employee be "re-priced" to the local market pay structure? Should a premium be offered for international experience? Many organizations move the employee to local salary levels. If there is an extreme difference in salary levels (either lower or higher), however, a phased-in approach is often carried out. On the other hand, oftentimes organizations justify paying an expatriate on a higher pay structure because of his/her international experience and business relationships with the home office.

2. Retirement benefits. Because retirement plans, social security and pensions do not cross national boundaries, this is often the most difficult item to transition. Often employees have expectations to remain on their home country retirement program, but unfortunately there is no typical solution to bridge the gap between country plans. Some basic alternatives include retaining the employee in a tax-qualified home country plan, simply transferring to the local plan or using an umbrella-funded plan.

3. Income taxes. Normally, the expatriate will simply transfer to the local tax system. This is not a problem for most of the world. American workers, however, are put in a difficult situation because they are taxed on a worldwide basis. Many organizations will continue the "tax equalization" process on an as-needed basis to prevent double taxation on American expatriates. Employees of other nationalities do not require such assistance.

4. Housing. It is recommended that organizations remain flexible regarding host country housing because many factors come into play when deciding how to handle housing for the expatriate. In many locations throughout the world, expatriate housing is vastly different than local standards and expectations. In some cases, it may be unreasonable to expect an expatriate to move into a local neighborhood or local style housing, e.g. Mumbai, Beijing, Jakarta, etc. Therefore, if the expatriate is moved to the local salary structure, a housing allowance may be needed to subsidize continued living in expatriate style housing. Other issues that arise with housing tax issues, family matters, property ownership laws, home search assistance and moving costs.

5. G&S differential/assignment incentives. In locations where assignees receive a G&S differential, the common practice is to immediately stop the allowance. Other options include a phase-out or lump-sum buyout, although it is rare for companies to continue to pay a G&S allowance beyond the effective localization date. Other assignment incentives such as mobility premiums, hardship allowances, etc. are also normally stopped upon conversion to local status.

6. Education for dependent children. After housing, this item is the most commonly subsidized cost after an expatriate is localized, especially if the local schools are inadequate based on international standards or if the host country language is an issue. To alleviate the problem, organizations should consider continuing education coverage, or pay a percentage of the education costs for one to two years.

7. Health care. Health care standards and costs vary greatly in different parts of the world and is a priority issue for most employees and their families. Normally, localizing employees will simply transfer into the local health care system, but concerns will arise if the health coverage in the new location is of a lower standard than in the home location. This will be a costly change for an employee coming into the United States, where typically the health care is more expensive. Because of their time spent in the host country, a localized employee will most likely be aware of the issues, and therefore be in a position to make appropriate decisions.

Finally, localization may subject the employee and the company to various employment laws and regulations that apply to employees hired by local companies. It is important to speak with a local employment counsel to understand the legal effects and ramifications of localization, including subjecting the company to stringent employment laws in some European countries.
Localizing expatriates can be a complicated process and is not as simple as transferring expatriates to a local compensation package. By having a strategic plan in place, companies can anticipate potential localization issues and make the process as efficient as possible.

In recent years there has been a significant shift from companies sending their employees on long-term assignments to short-term assignments. A long-term assignment is typically a one to three year assignment, although some may last five years or longer. Short-term assignments are typically 3 to 12 months.

So why the shift? 

The most obvious reason is an attempt to control cost. Most short-term assignment policies have less generous benefits attached to them and they are often single status, so the view is that the cost is less. This is not always the case though, as the cost is highly dependent on tax complexities caused by the home and host country tax rules, and the individual’s income and personal situations.

Other less obvious reasons are that employees are turning down the opportunity to take a long-term assignment. They are turning them down because of the following reasons:

• Concerns about security and terrorism
• Dual career family issues
• Career re-entry issues on completion of an assignment

Security and terrorism concerns are higher on individual’s agendas than they used to be.  Employees do not want to expose their families to such risks, real or perceived.

A much larger percentage of families now have dual careers, so when one member is offered a career development opportunity overseas, it means the other member has to give up their own promising career. For both personal and financial reasons the option to take the assignment is less attractive.

The age old problem of re-entry to the home office after a lengthy assignment is still alive and well. An assignee comes back after three years and is faced with unfamiliar faces, values and yes, politics from when he left. Unless there has been some very good career planning the assignee will often be slotted into a position that lacks challenge compared to his overseas role.

Short-term assignments can be a good alternative solution to long-term assignments to avoid some of these issues. A short-term assignment means the employee can either go on single status or the spouse can take a sabbatical without damaging their own career. A shorter time out of the home office is less likely to impact the employee’s career opportunities.

Many companies have realized this and have come to terms with the concept of shorter assignments. Deciding if they are indeed less expensive is a future topic for discussion.

Avrom Goldberg
Managing Director, Asia-Pacific and the Middle East
SIRVA Relocation

Lorraine Jennings
Manager, Consulting Services, Asia-Pacific and the Middle East
SIRVA Relocation

As Avrom Goldberg and Lorraine Jennings explained, it is important for relocation professionals to stay up-to-date on relocation trends in China because of the country’s power as regional and global economic engine.  For each of the past 30 years, China has demonstrated eight to 12 percent economic growth, and it is showing no signs of slowing down.  In order to provide attendees with valuable insights and analysis of the current relocation trends in this rising economic power, Avrom and Lorraine described the findings of the SIRVA’s China Mobility Report.  While Avrom and Lorraine could not summarize the entire 95-page report during the presentation, they shared highlights of their findings.

Increased demand for deployment to China, one trend discussed during the presentation, is expected to continue.  However, the sources of assignees selected for deployment are changing.  Traditionally, assignees to China came from Australia, Europe, the United Kingdom and the United States.  Recently, hiring has been more concentrated in Asia, with most assignees coming in the form of returning Chinese workers or locally hired foreigners.

Companies who continue to send assignees to China are using a variety of selection and planning processes that do not follow a pattern.  For example, pre-assignment visits ranged from a brief three days to a full week; some companies offer extensive cross-cultural training for assignees while others do not; certain companies assign mentors, some extend mentoring programs to leadership programs, and others offer no structured mentoring to assignees in China.  In these areas of their relocation programs, companies are not following a uniform trend, but rather they are doing what is in the best interest of their individual organizations.

On the other hand, companies are moving in the same direction in other areas of their programs.  For example, many companies are changing their philosophies of hardship allowances.  While 51% of companies offer hardship allowances across all assignments, many are developing new ideas of what places they consider “difficult.”  Avrom and Lorraine mentioned Shanghai and Beijing as places that recently necessitated hardship allowances, but may no longer justify as high of a level of compensation.  Furthermore, many companies are shifting from a host-based to a home-based approach for hardship allowance policies, which illustrates that companies are finding a home-based method more effective in China’s current economic framework.  

Regardless of which specific policies and programs companies decide are most useful when sending their employees on assignments to China, the companies within SIRVA’s study agreed on the obstacles that they must overcome.  They identified the following as the top-five human resources and mobility challenges they face when filling assignments in China:

• Creating effective policy frameworks for separate groups, such as locally hired foreigners or international new hires who are not full assignee
• Understanding, capturing and reporting the total cost of assignments to the company, including measuring the return on investment of the assignments
• Locating quality service providers in China with a strategic vision
• Developing a young workforce with global cultural competency
• Finding credible benchmarks for hardship allowances and housing data for assignments in China

As a kick-off to my blog, A Closer Look at Global Relocation, I wanted to introduce myself and explain what I plan to discuss over the next couple months.

As a global relocation services leader, I am in contact with a variety of global mobility customers and providers on a day-to-day basis and I’ve found that there are some topics that seem to be of interest to most professionals whenever they relocate employees—be it the U.S., China or anywhere else in the world. Since I have been able to benchmark and study these highly relevant topics, I thought it would make the most sense to start this blog with some of this information. With that said, I will be initiating a discussion on barriers to assignment acceptance and how to overcome them, then I will be covering the latest trends in relocating to and within China and the true cost of an expatriate assignment, how to measure and track—all of which I feel will instigate a solid discussion on the challenges and barriers facing global mobility programs and introduce some best practices for overcoming these obstacles.

Are there any other topics that you feel would be relevant to cover? I am open to suggestions.