3 ms·

I feel what you are saying but... that IS the reason people offshore. Why else would they ship jobs out of the US, deal with funky hours, bad phone connections,

I feel what you are saying but... that IS the reason people offshore. Why else would they ship jobs out of the US, deal with funky hours, bad phone connections, and often times very thick accents (which when combined with bad phone connections often render conversations 80% understandable at best) if not to save money? I would feel like crap if I was in that position too but I don't know how you go about solving it and still have a valid justification for offshoring that outweighs the negatives.

satwikhebbar 10y ago
In my experience, the thickness of accents works both ways. There is no such thing as a pure accent - only what you are more used to.
eequah9L 10y ago
Shortage of local talent might be another possibility. On my team, about half the people are not local--I'm a remotee working from a different country, and a bunch of other folks are outsourced from India and Ukraine. I don't have insight into how much the outsourcing costs, but a figure of $50 per hour has been floated in this discussion. At that point you are pretty much back to local wages, so my guess is it's not the money. This may not be your typical outsourcing story though. Individual people are actually hired like you would hire anyone local, with interviews and all, except it's a manager traveling there to do a series of interviews and not vice versa. The team is quite stable, the churn reported in the article doesn't seem to be a problem.
- jsymolon 10y ago
  > Shortage of local talent might be another possibility. Only shortage is, is a person at the price that they want to pay.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]