Think finding an expatriate who is willing to relocate is half the challenge? If you aren’t too careful, more problems can crop up in the host nation too.
With the increased employee mobility in the global business world, there are several disciplines which need to be addressed to achieve success when relocating expatriates to the new host country.
In the world of mobile employees, there are several disciplines which need to be addressed to achieve success. This article will focus on the activities, which take place in the host destination location. These are commonly referred to as Destination Services Programmes or DSP. However, for clarity sake, one must be aware of all the “touch points” of the relocation process such as the “pre”, “post” and “repatriation” stages, as well as, “who’s who” in the process chain. In addition to DSP, the following items must, at a minimum, be reviewed by a business unit’s decision to engage the services of a foreigner:
• Costs of assignment based on the type of assignee, an expatriate, local hire, or hybrid package.
• Tax liability in host and possibly home country (known as the tax equalisation benefit to the individual and the business unit).
Immigration requirements and long-term residency schemes which may affect the dependents of assignee.
Whether managed in-house or outsourced, the first and foremost priority in any international assignment must be a holistic HR approach. HR managers are not called human resources managers because they manage “widgets”. They manage people – meaning people’s careers and their lives! After all, with the exception of a very few industrial operations, companies still require people to get the job done. Hence, in any relocation process, the overriding factor to insure success must be the attention focused on the employee and if applicable, their accompanying dependents.
To ensure success at the operational level, however, key managers must have a “bird’s eye” or the “big picture” view of all processes to insure that the expatriate’s integration is seamless. Let me share a case to make my point.
Case in point
An MNC in Singapore needed an employee to implement a critical change to its proprietary software in its manufacturing line. After a companywide search by the employer, Teo Choo Ling, a Chinese National, based in Shanghai, China, was selected. Teo was immediately asked by his employer to come to Singapore to consider taking up the assignment. No offer of employment letter was raised at this “look-see” stage because it was the MNC’s policy that until the candidate agrees to the terms and conditions of the assignment, no offers would be negotiated.
During Teo’s “look-see” visit, he acknowledged that he would take up the assignment to the Singapore line manager in a telephone conversation. The line manager, who was very anxious to bring Teo onboard, encouraged Teo to “carry on with the necessities that will insure him to get here as fast as possible”. Teo, through the efforts of a local property agent who was introduced to him by a well-intentioned department admin, found the “perfect” accommodation that would suit his family’s needs. Teo, again, through the efforts of well-meaning local friends managed to secure places in a local school for his Mandarin-speaking dependents. There was only one problem: Teo did not have an employment contract, which meant immigration could not begin. It also meant money deposits would not be released by the local HR for either the housing or the schooling, so the spiral of disappointment began.
What should have been done in the above example to allow the key managers the “bird’s eye” or the “big picture” view to ensure success? Two of the most serious issues could have been averted by:
1 Teo should not have been allowed to board the plane to Singapore for the “look-see” trip without an initial idea of his employment terms and conditions. However, since this had occurred, the problems could have been averted by taking the next step In a survey done in 2004 among SMEs and MNCs operating in APAC, it was discovered that over 80% of employees began an assignment in a foreign country without an employee contract.
2 Once in Singapore and alerted to the fact that Teo was willing to accept the position, Teo’s line manager should have been in touch with HR to determine what could and could not be done during the trip. He should have explained specifically to Teo what he was able to do in person and not over the telephone to emphasise the importance of the policies.
A recent survey in Singapore conducted among SMEs by a DSP firm, found that 40% of employees had committed to realtors (without their employer’s knowledge) without their immigration being approved. In a further 15%, the property agents had even advanced the holding deposit because the assignee did not have a bank account open (which requires an employment pass) and the funds would take too long if the company were to issue the holding deposit. Out of fear that the deal would be lost, the property agent advanced the deposit. Employees are often stressed over well meaning friends and colleagues – especially in a city like Singapore where rents increase on a daily basis and school places are scarce. This often results in an employee making commitments that can be costly or even worse, illegal.
I believe the following should be the benchmarks of a successful, well managed, process involving the most critical factors of any employee’s relocation – but most certainly the components of a DSP.
• Educate the specific community about what will happen.
There are many parts to a whole – and each part must understand the impact that any of their actions will create. Do not leave this to your vendor manager to execute. The vendor manager is often not completely aware of the details of the actual implementation.
• Inform those involved with repeated communication
Explaining to a department once at the onset of a new policy is not sufficient to insure that the message will stay “alive” with all in the department – especially newcomers.
• Identify who does what at each stage
It is critical that each step is known by all to insure that actions taken will not compromise overall success. Ensure ownership is acknowledged and accountability is engaged.
• Understand the work process from those who deliver
Insure you meet with those who actually provide the service and not only with a vendor manager. Understand exactly what happens in any process – not to the point of micro managing, but to the “bird’s eye” or “big picture” view.
• Create a process flow and get buy in
Insure that your process engages decision makers input prior to the roll out of any new policy – or you will find your efforts “sabotaged”.
• Create “stop” points
If any party along the way identifies an “out of process” to the accepted policy, an immediate stop to the process must occur and the violation must be escalated within four hours, with a response time of 12 hours by the owner of the particular process.
• Design escalation
Identify someone within the immediate organisation who is aware of the current implementation process to decide what must be done and reach resolution within 12 hours.
• Empower
Trust your internal and external partners who have the knowledge of what is necessary to act as your advocate in all matters.
As an advocate of planning and also a believer in Murphy’s Law (anything that can go wrong will go wrong – especially in a different time zone and a different culture), I do believe the best success is achieved when steps are taken to understand and execute processes which you ‘buy’ into. Using the above points will most definitely encourage your HR team and improve your chances of any project’s success.
Beverly D. Mayhew
Founder and principle partner
Orientations
http://www.orientations.com/
