Do expatriates make better managers?

DEBATE

To me, the entire controversy on whether we should have expatriate managers, or whether expatriates make better managers is quite unnecessary. In a global era, the only relevant question is whether an individual has the competencies required by a manager and a leader and whether he has the competencies and exposure that may be required for a specific job.

The opening up of the Indian economy has in the last decade given many managers in India an opportunity to deal with global challenges in our domestic markets. Several of our local companies have reinvented themselves and have managed to hold their own despite international competition with deep pockets in their field. The booming stock markets in India, where there are in fact very few multinational companies listed, also reflect the strong performance of many Indian companies and not just the "economy". This in itself is a strong reflection of the capability of Indian management.

The achievement of the Indian IT industry globally and the fact that there is international recognition of our large IT companies showcases the ability of our managers and leaders to make a mark globally. The fact that there is so much large-scale offshoring happening in India and most of these organisations are managed by local Indians is an acknowledgement of our talent.

Many Indians have also demonstrated their abilities in the global arena in several industries and spheres. Leaders like Victor Menezes, Ajay Banga, Ranjit Gupta and Indira Nooyi have shown us that Indians can manage global corporations as effectively as local organisations.

Today, there is a greater understanding that the markets in Asia are different and need different approaches. The recognition that Asian cultures are different and, therefore, at times, need different management and leadership styles is well appreciated.

A manager's success in any market is his ability to appreciate this and adapt his learnings from other markets to this reality. Being an expatriate does not automatically mean that one knows more or can leverage his experience. We have many examples of expatriate managers not being able to understand how to adapt to the local reality and not being able to get the commitment of more talented Indian managers. Global exposure does open one's minds to possibilities and enables leveraging on a different knowledge base and experience. However, it is the individual "" local or expatriate "" who either uses this constructively or not. It is his individual competencies and attitude that makes him a better or worse manager.

I believe that typecasting people in a global world is only reflective of a narrow perspective. We should respect and accept individuals for their abilities, without consideration of gender or nationality.

Sandeep Chaudhary,
Business Leader (Consulting) India,
Hewitt Associates

Globalisation often forces organisations to confront the crucial issue of how best to balance the desire for global consistency and control local effectiveness and efficiency. Global companies typically require two things of a local CEO. That is, to build the local business by identifying and adapting to local customer needs, and to get economies of scale and scope by extending the values, systems and culture of the parent organisation into the local operation. The dynamic tension between these two understandable "" but sometimes contradictory "" imperatives define much of the management challenge for local CEOs in global companies.  The expat CEO may have more of a "prove it" attitude and is passionate about creating a success story by largely chasing financial targets. Since the tenure is usually two to four years, in the dogged style, what gets neglected are softer issues like employee engagement. The local CEO aims more at building a sustainable business which has long-term capability. This requires passion on all aspects of business. But this certainly is not true across the board. We have also observed that an expat CEO is easily able to bring the resource of the wider global company into play.  An expat CEO really needs to take the time to find out about the local market, customers, culture, government and so on. They have to be more conscious about the fact that they are not taking an approach that may have worked overseas, and attempt to slam that into the local organisation.  Also, sometimes organisations find it easier to bring the resources of the wider company to bear on any local business problems. We think that's a big part of what being a multinational should be about "" mobilising the resources of the company in the interests of the local business. CEO succession planning across the corporate world is not very sound, and this often pushes organisations to look at global talent pool. Various organisations present global mobility as an element of reward and it is an effective retention strategy. Also, India is no more a punishment posting, it is in fact the hottest markets to be in. Expat CEOs are eager to gain the India experience and enhance their career value. In many sectors such as aviation and R&D, India lacks depth and width of relevant experience at the leadership level; hence organisations are looking for foreign talent.  Indians today are recognised as the top leadership talent in the world. Most well managed organisations provide international exposure in order to integrate the leadership talent with the global philosophy. We in the past have seen a lot of Indians moving to head overseas subsidiaries. Both expat and local CEOs could be successful given that they have the right strategic intent for the organisation and its people.  

Views expressed are personal