Developing an effective repatriation strategy for MNC: a model and tools for International Human Resource Management.
Chew, Janet ; Debowski, Shelda
With the increasing movement of employees across national
boundaries comes a stronger focus on the needs of repatriates of
multinational corporations. These workers have needs that are often
unrecognized In particular, they may suffer similar emotional
dislocation to those working as expatriates. However, many companies
fail to recognise or accommodate these concerns in their policies or
practices. This paper proposes a model for developing an effective
repatriation support process. It includes the four elements of policy
development, construction of a repatriation agreement, the provision of
repatriation programs, and the evaluation of the success of these
strategies. The model is supported through the provision of a set of
tools that may help guide those working in repatriation services.
1. Introduction
The importance of retaining quality personnel is reinforced
throughout management literature. There is widespread understanding of
the need for well thought-out policies and processes to support an
organization's staff--from recruitment and on through an
individual's various career phases (Brewster and Pickard, 1994;
Suutari and Brewster, 2003; Tung, 1998). However, one area of career
management has been little explored or recognized in human resource
management; supporting repatriates upon their return from an overseas
posting (Black, Gregersen et al. 1992; Lazarova, 2001; Swaak, 1997).
Studies have highlighted the need for multinational companies to pay
particular attention to enhancing expatriates' commitment to the
parent firm, and to developing their commitment to the new local work
unit during the repatriation process (Bonache, 2005; Gregersen and
Black, 1996; Hansen, 1997). However, these concepts are neither well
documented nor well developed in international human resource
management, well documented nor well developed in international human
resource management.
2. The Repatriation Issue
Repatriation occurs when an expatriate of a multinational
corporation returns to the country of his/her origin from an overseas
assignment (Hodgetts and Luthans, 1997). While repatriation is perceived
to be a non-issue for many companies, there is substantial literature on
expatriation and the challenges that must be addressed when moving an
employee and his/her family to a country with different cultural
dimensions and significant social and economic contrasts (Dowling and
Schuler, 1990; Klaff, 2002; O'Neil and Kramer, 1995; Tung, 1988).
Thus, there is a strong recognition of the problems faced when moving to
a foreign climate.
However, many companies assume that the move back to home territory
will be relatively simple because the language is the repatriate's
own, the culture is one with which the whole family should be familiar,
and the home conditions are perceived to be the same as those left
behind. From this perspective, it would appear that repatriates would
slip smoothly into the old environment and not require significant
support. Unfortunately, this simplistic view of the transition ignores
many issues. Repatriation is a complex process, generating similar
issues to those encountered when managing expatriation (Engen, 1995;
Swaak, 1997). First, the repatriate is returning from a high-status
position with high autonomy to a less highly profiled role in the parent
company. Career opportunities may also diminish, rather than expand, as
a result of working overseas. The challenges and satisfaction associated
with greater responsibility may be exchanged for a feeling of boredom
and under-utilization. In addition, the repatriate is no longer
"special" or different from fellow workers. There is feeling
of being 'let-down', which significantly affects work
satisfaction. Additionally, the transition back home may be problematic
for all family members (Hammer and Hart, 1998). A returning expatriate
may experience reverse culture shock when he or she re-enters the home
country (Hammer and Hart, 1998). Salary and fringe benefits provided
while on foreign assignments are now lost, and the expatriate and family
must adjust to a lower standard of living. The spouse and children are
also confronted with practical readjustment problems, such as housing
and schooling. It is understandable that companies may find their
repatriates somewhat disillusioned and jaded on their return.
Repatriate retention is proving to be a major concern to those
working in the international sector. Despite the substantial costs
involved in developing the potential of high caliber employees to take
and hold expatriate roles, these same people are often dissatisfied on
their return to their homelands (Napier and Peterson, 1991; Suutari and
Valimaa, 2002; Tung 1998). It has been reported that up to 25 percent of
repatriates wish to leave the company after their return to a
"normal post" (Abueva, 2000; Adler, 1991; Black and Gregersen,
1990). This turnover rate is significantly higher than for local
incumbents (Black, Gregersen et al., 1992; Brewster 1997; Gregersen
1992; Harvey 1989; Kendall 1981; MacDonald and Arthur, 2005; Mendenhall
and Oddou, 1991; Oddou, 1991). It represents a significant loss--the
cost of losing a single repatriated employee has been estimated to be as
high as $1.5 million (Abueva, 2000; Black, 1992; Peck, 1997).
Extensive direct costs are incurred when firms must replace
departing executives who possess valuable international and corporate
experience (Carpenter, Sanders and Gregersen, 2000; Harvey, 1989; Latta,
1999). Substantial indirect costs also occur when repatriates withdraw
crucial market knowledge, host-country client relationships, and
international skills upon their departure to other employers--who are
often gaining a competitive advantage from their new staff members
(Mendenhall and Oddou, 1991: Peck, 1997). Poor repatriation can also
result in a loss of high-potential employees, employee
under-utilization, and subsequent employee reluctance to accept overseas
positions (Allen and Alvarez, 1998; Suutari and Brewster, 2003). Hence,
organizations must plan for repatriation, and implement effective
repatriation programs and practices to successfully retain people with
global insight and experience (Adler, 1981; MacDonald and Arthur, 2005;
Solomon, 1995; Swank, 1997).
3. The Challenge of Repatriation
Traditionally, expatriates have been primarily managerial
executives, with the role of controlling an overseas branch of the
parent company. However, the increasing globalisation of business has
led to an expansion in the range of personnel that is sent overseas to
work and gain experience. Engineers, information technologists, and
other specialists are increasingly moving into a globalised work arena
(Chew, 2004; Latta, 1999). The resulting diversity of repatriated
personnel generates two challenges. First, the processes and policies
relating to repatriation must be more rigorously developed and
documented in order to facilitate equitable and efficient management of
the program. Second, there should be a greater awareness of the need to
develop such programs in order to increase the retention rate of
experienced expatriates (Birdseye and Hill, 1995; Morley, 2003; Punnett
and Rick, 1997).
4. Repatriation Program Provision
Studies of repatriation have identified the limited nature of
repatriation processes, even in large companies (e.g. Chew, 2004;
Dowling and Schuler, 1990; Tung, 1988). They have revealed erratic and
cost-focused practices that only marginally emphasized the needs of
repatriates and their families. The results confirm other research that
also notes a limited formalization of repatriation processes (e.g.
Bonache, 2005; Black, 1992; Lazarova, 2001; Suutari and Brewster, 2003;
Swank, 1997). While organizations that are more globalised offer more
structured repatriation practices, they do not necessarily demonstrate
more formalised practices (Suutari and Valimaa, 2002; Chew, 2004).
Instead, they have articulated their processes to streamline the
processing of greater numbers of returned expatriates. Organizations
with fewer expatriates tend to maintain an informal and negotiable
process. This can lead to inequities, and a failure to provide core
support strategies to returning repatriates.
A study of organisational repatriation policies and processes
identified some significant issues relating to good practice (Chew,
2004). First, while it was understood that the family and spouse were
important in achieving successful repatriation, there was little focus
on these participants in the selection process, or in the subsequent
policies and processes of preparation and debriefing. Cost was cited as
a major reason for this omission. Second, technical competence remains a
significant criterion for success, although there is evidence of
increasing recognition of personal and relational attributes as factors
to consider. Respondents also noted the dilemma of dual career families.
Despite the increasing scope of the repatriation programmes, and their
recognition of possible strategies, there was little evidence of a
cohesive or considered repatriation process--even in globalised
companies with high levels of repatriate activity.
In interviews with fifteen respondents, it was evident that many
managers were seeking guidance on developing better repatriation
strategies. Participants requested copies of the structured interview
questionnaire, and expressed a keen interest in gaining a better
understanding of possible strategies for improved repatriate support.
They recommended the development of tools and guidelines for use by
International Human Resource Management professionals in order to enable
better service to the organisation.
A model for successful repatriation is presented in this paper
based on the aforementioned study, as well as on other models drawn from
expatriation and repatriation literature. Although many existing models
fail to address a broad scope of successfully managing repatriation and
are based on American studies, in contrast, this paper presents an
integrated model based on data from a study of current repatriation
practices for Australian multinationals. This paper is also novel
because in-depth studies on Australian multinationals are scarce
(Brewster, 1997), and industry practitioners have admitted to a need to
improve the retention of their international human resource (Chew,
2004).
5. The Importance of Developing a Repatriation Program
An international human resource management strategy often evolves
slowly as the company increases its connections with overseas entities.
The gradual evolution of practice can led to an unplanned and
unstructured array of services and support mechanisms.
A successful repatriate will normally be highly qualified, and have
a suite of valuable skills, knowledge, and attributes (Hodgetts and
Luthans, 1997; Solomon, 1995). in addition, the expatriate experience
will have created many opportunities to grow, both culturally and
technically. The growth of the individual should be accommodated in
adaptation processes undertaken on return to their home country.
Employees with an outstanding track record prior to their expatriate
assignment should be nurtured and well-positioned upon their return.
This would not only provide a sense of career continuity, but would
demonstrate the value the company places on expatriate assignments
(Allen, 1998; Black, 1992; Mon et al., 2005; Swaak, 1997). While this
can ensure the expatriation process is successful, it becomes even more
critical that the return of these highly valued participants be managed
smoothly and efficiently. As repatriates, their services need to be
retained. They must feel that their interests have been served by the
organisation. It is critically important that the repatriate perceives a
well-constructed support program to be in place.
International firms can influence their employees' commitment
by developing effective strategies for repatriation (Gregersen, 1992).
Such policies and practices have significantly reduced high repatriation
turnover in many U.S. multinationals (Harvey, 1989; Latta, 1999; Stroh,
1995). While these may be seen as the province of larger, globalised
firms, they should be prominent components of HRM processes for
organisations dealing with repatriates.
Most organisations recognise the need to support repatriates,
particularly in the areas of financial and career counseling, and in the
provision of family-orientated strategies (Black, 1992; Klaff, 2002;
Swaak, 1997). While these general services are understood and provided
in an ad-hoc manner by many international human resource managers, very
few companies have established integrated programs to effectively manage
repatriation (Black and Gregersen et al., 1992; Lazarova, 2001),
possibly due to a lack of understanding of how to plan and prepare for
the process. The absence of careful planning and implementation sends a
negative message to expatriates, who may feel marginalized and concerned
that they are being neglected whilst on assignment. The construction of
an effective repatriation strategy is a key factor in retaining valued
personnel.
6. A Model of Repatriation Practice
An effective repatriation strategy comprises four stages and is
cyclical in nature. Figure 1 illustrates the four integrated components.
First, the principles and philosophy of the repatriation strategy must
be developed. Second, the repatriation strategy must be translated into
a formal documented agreement. The strategy is then enacted in the third
stage through supportive programs. Finally, a re-entry evaluation should
be undertaken in order to identify areas that require further
consideration by the IHRM division (Chew, 2004; Solomon, 1995; Vamer and
Palmer, 2002).
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
Stage 1: Planning for Repatriation
Organizations should plan for repatriation well before employees
arrive back from their overseas assignment, if they wish to cultivate
long-term retention (Harvey, 1989; O'Neil & Kramar, 1995;
Stroh, 1995). Forward-planning reduces some of the anxieties associated
with repatriation, and provides expatriates with a sense of stability.
There must be clarity as to the principles and philosophies which are to
be followed when constructing a repatriation strategy (Bonache, 2005;
Petersen & Sargent, 1996; Rahim, 1983; Solomon, 1995; Stevens,
1998). Policies should provide guidelines to ensure that all repatriates
are fairly treated whilst working away from the company base. Sample
policies are available in the literature (e.g. Allen and Alvarez, 1998;
Forster, 2000; MacDonald and Arthur, 2005; Petersen and Sargent, 1996;
Sievers, 1998; Solomon, 1995; Suutari and Brewster, 2003). They
demonstrate the value of documenting the organisational commitment to
repatriation.
A policy may incorporate a number of elements:
1. A statement recognising the possible stress repatriation may
cause, and the support of the company during the time of transition.
2. An affirmation of the value of expatriates to the employer, and
the importance of their skills upon his/her return.
3. A review of the rights of the employee during the repatriation
process.
4. An outline of the degree to which the employer accepts
responsibility for family settlement on return to the home country.
5. The identification of specialist support services which can
provide assistance to the repatriate during the transition phase.
Like any policy, a discussion of issues and principles is ideally
undertaken in consultation with relevant stakeholders. Interviews of
repatriates, IHRM experts, a literature search, and a consideration of
organisational culture and values can all assist in the development of
the policy. The initial draft may benefit from review by those most
likely to be affected, including those in finance, human resource
management, and executives who deal with repatriate workers (Caliguiri
and Lazarova, 2001; Solomon, 1995). Representatives of those same
workers should be encouraged to contribute to the process.
Once constructed, the policy benefits from wide promotion,
including prominent placement on the intranet, and to those identified
as potential expatriates. The policy need not be extensive. However, it
should be a clear statement of support for those planning to return to
their previous work setting. A simple framework is provided as
Attachment 1 to assist in the developmental process. The construction
and promotion of a repatriation policy assists in affirming the
company's commitment to repatriates. It serves to assure those
departing and those returning as to the social responsibility of the
company. Yet, a policy is of little value if it is not allied with
action.
Stage 2: The Repatriate Agreement
A company makes a significant investment in an employee who slated
to work overseas. Thus, plans must be made in the early stages to
determine how the employee's newly acquired skills will be utilized
upon return (Klaff, 200:2; Stroh, 1995). A repatriation agreement should
be developed at the onset of each international assignment to manage the
employee's goals and expectations. Included in such an agreement is
a specification of the assignment period, details of the return,
incentive payment, a guarantee of a job equal to or better than the one
held before leaving, provision for re-entry training, and a repatriation
program to support the repatriate and help the family readjust upon
return to their home country. The specification of relocation support
such as pre-repatriation house-hunting, school registration, and
shipment of personal goods further strengthens the agreement (Allen and
Alvarez, 1998; Bonache, 2005; Cagney, 1975; Frazee, 1997; Hammer and
Hart, 1998; Kramar, MacDonald and Arthur, 2005; McGraw et al., 1997).
Table 1 summarises the core elements of a repatriation agreement that
would demonstrate equitable and effective repatriation practices. This
agreement should be signed prior to departure, providing the employee
with an assurance of fair and equitable support on return. Developing
such an agreement would greatly assist in retaining good repatriates.
A repatriation agreement will greatly assist in clarifying the
support a repatriate may reasonably expect from the employer. The
commitment to providing career planning whilst an employee is away is
particularly important to retaining good employees. If an
expatriate's career stagnates upon return then the company sends a
strong message to future candidates that an overseas assignment is a
poor career move. Hence, companies should visibly nurture the careers of
those that are on overseas assignments (Howard, 1974; Molnar and Loewe,
1997; Morley, 2003).
Loss of visibility is one of the most commonly expressed fears of
employees at all levels as they contemplate the possibility of being
assigned to an area far from headquarters. Modern technologies such as
fax, phone, voice mail, and e-mail make it much easier to keep in touch
with colleagues than in the past. The key is to maintain regular contact
for the purpose of maintaining rapport, educating colleagues about work
in the field, and remaining current with developments in the home
country (Alvarez, 1998). The most effective visibility strategy is
personal visits to headquarters, which also allows family members to
stay in touch with changes at home.
Stage 3: Repatriation Programs
Many companies have excellent intentions. However, the
implementation of repatriation programs often leaves much to be desired.
Repatriation is similar to other human resource practices in that it can
flounder badly if left on its own. The appointment of a repatriation
manager is a major step for creating an effective repatriation process.
The manager is then responsible for tracking individual repatriates,
providing specialized support and re-entry programs, and assessing the
adequacy of policies and their implementation. The appointment of a
specific contact person ensures that someone is accountable for the
success of the repatriation program.
There are a number of issues that must be addressed when the
employee returns home. The key issues are the provision of a comparable
or better position in the company, and assistance for the employee and
family in re-assimilating into the home culture (Chew, 2004; O'Neil
and Kramar, 1995). Companies must ensure that an overseas assignment
benefits an individual's career, and that this commitment is
visible to the work community. Repatriates should receive challenging
assignments that utilise their newly acquired skills, and their
international experience should be used to guide expansion of the home
country's operations. Additionally, employers need to ensure that
expatriate career trajectories compare favourably to those employees
that did not go overseas. If a significant number of the company's
senior managers have international experience the company sends an
effective signal to its employees that international experience counts
(Adler, 1981; Scullion and Brewster, 2001).
In order to achieve this, it is necessary to integrate repatriation
management data into the human resource management system (Howard,
1974), and to ensure ongoing intra-company communication. In addition, a
regular scan of career opportunities and movements--to be escalated into
an intense program of preparation six months before the expatriate
returns--should be managed on the employee's behalf. It is also
important to make an organized and concerted effort to reposition the
expatriate in a position that will utilize his/her new skills and
perspectives, as well as one that will call for further development.
These core strategies are employed by successful international companies
(Borstorff, 1997; Hansen, 1997; Oddou, 1991; Scullion and Starkey, 2000;
Solomon, 1995; Varner and Palmer, 2002).
The use of a structured career development plan can assist
employees in considering various options and their implications on
current and future opportunities (Field and Thomas, 1992; MacDonald and
Arthur, 2005). Long before proposing an international assignment, the
general HR planning system can encourage high potential employees to
build firsthand international experience into their longterm career
plans. This would enable employees to look ahead to the experience, give
them a chance to gain cross-cultural and language skills, and prepare
their family for overseas relocation before it happens. This approach
can reinforce the importance of international experience as a career
building block, and reduce the shock of such an assignment when it
occurs (Allen, 1998; Fieldman, 1992; Ruisala and Suutari, 2000).
Another repatriation strategy is the use of mentors. The mentor
serves as an adviser and confidant, and helps to foster a connection
between the expatriate and the home country operation. A formal mentor
would support each expatriate while in the field, and assist in his/her
successful return. They should be assigned before departure in order to
allow sufficient time to establish a rapport between the two parties.
Expatriates who feel connected with the home country may experience less
conflict with home operations and develop a stronger sense of commitment
upon return (Gregersen, 1992; Scullion and Brewster, 2003). The
expatriate's mentor and the HR department are the most important
vehicles for identifying suitable job opportunities in preparation for
return. Mentors in companies with Internet or electronic job postings
can make sure that expatriates are tied into those systems as well
(Frazee, 1997). A screening and training program for mentors should be
carried out to ensure consistency. Characteristics associated with
successful mentors include personal international experience, sufficient
influence to advocate for the expatriate (particularly during
repatriation), and the dedication required to keep in contact with the
expatriate (Swaak, 1997).
When an international assignment is offered, the expatriate can be
given a preview of the types of jobs guaranteed on their return (Kramar,
1997; Morley, 2003). The jobs offered should be comparable to, and not
lower in level than, the one held before the overseas assignment. This
commitment to the expatriate will lead to two outcomes. First, the
employee is more likely to accept the overseas position, and experience
less uncertainty and stress about his or her return to the home country.
Second, having issued a guarantee the company will be more likely to
take the necessary steps to provide for the smooth repatriation of the
employee (Allen, 1998; Black, 1992; Lazarova, 2001).
Since most international assignments are temporary, it is likely
that an expatriate's next job move will be back in their home
country's organization. Unless the expatriate is retained in the HR
planning system, he or she will be entirely excluded from job
screenings, while the domestic employee will be included. Appearance in
job screenings, even before a planned return, will increase the
visibility that many expatriates fear losing while in the field. (Allen
and Alvarez, 1998; Klaff, 2002; Mendenhall, 1987).
Many international assignments come with a fixed end-date. In some
cases, this is necessary to accommodate school schedules and assure
employees that they will return to the home country in a timely fashion.
The downside is that a fixed return date tends to limit job
opportunities (Abueva, 2000; Cagney, 1975; Fieldman, 1992). A more open
re-entry time frame of three months to one year will increase the
likelihood that an appropriate position can be found for the expatriate.
The expatriate will have the flexibility to explore and select job
possibilities. While the certainty of a specific re-entry may be
comforting, the flexibility to exercise greater choice over the return
time and position he or she accepts may be welcomed by both employee and
family.
Organisations can also increase repatriation options for employees
by allowing for the possibility of cross-divisional moves. The sending
division may feel temporarily unhappy by this approach since it would
lose the services of a valued employee. However, the company as a whole
would continue to benefit from the effective retention of a valued
employee--who may at some point return to the original division (Allen
and Alvarez, 1998; Morley, 2003).
Occasional placement problems can occur even after employing
advanced career planning methods and building more flexibility in the
placement process. Under these circumstances, the creation of a
temporary holding job (either in the home or host country) may provide a
bridge for an expatriate until a suitable position is found. For
instance, repatriates can be temporarily placed in consulting capacities
within the company or assigned to a special project. This option should
be implemented with care or the holding position could become
indefinite, causing the eventual departure of the employee from the
firm. This issue can be addressed through the establishment of a strict
time frame and a clear set of objectives associated with the assignment.
The assignment should involve a substantial, value-added contribution to
the company that will offer an opportunity for the employee to maintain
visibility and credibility within the organisation (Allen and Alvarez,
1998; Forster, 2000; Scullion and Brewster, 2003).
Expatriates often report that their international experience is
ignored or ostracized because they encounter a hostile reception upon
their return. While a more receptive environment cannot be dictated by
senior management, several approaches can help the organisation better
value and utilise expatriate background. These include arranging an
event to welcome and recognise the employee and family, and
incorporating a post-assignment interview with the expatriate and spouse
to review their experiences and identify any repatriation issues that
the firm should address (Fieldman, 1992; Ruisala and Suuitari, 2000).
A repatriate directory and network can be established in order to
facilitate ongoing follow-up with former expatriates as the repatriation
process continues. A database can also help track other important
information on international assignments, such as average length of
stay, percentage of completed assignments, locations and reasons for
early terminations, length of stay with the organisation after return,
and career movement of repatriates (Chowanec and Newstrom, 1991;
Scullion and Valimaa, 2002). The database can also help the company
utilise former expatriates for assignments that require their unique
expertise.
Training and preparation of new expatriates is an important
function that repatriates and their families can be called upon to
perform. Repatriates can offer firsthand experience and advice to
prospective international assignees, their families, and newly returned
repatriates. Several expatriates noted that it was important to screen
the repatriates and their families before assigning them to this
preparation role since excessive negativity could scare away prospective
expatriates, or set up expectations that tainted the field experience
from the outset. Ideally, expatriates should be chosen for their ability
to convey a realistic, but enthusiastic, account of the experience in
the field (Carpenter et al., 2000; Frazee, 1997; Gregersen, 1996).
Table 2 summarizes the key features of an effective repatriation
program discussed so far.
Black et al. (1992a) describe the 'spillover' effect,
which occurs when a family resettles comfortably, leading to increased
expatriate effectiveness. Given the difficulties of re-entry,
expatriates and their families need help to reestablish their lives.
Re-entry training should focus primarily on helping the repatriate and
spouse align their expectations with the actual situation that will be
encountered, both within the organisational context and, more broadly,
within the social milieu (Bonache, 2005; Hammer and Hart, 1998). The
political nature of the work necessitates a re-acculturation process;
power blocs, alliances, strategic priorities, and directions all shift
over time. A break from the local environment for this length of time
requires re-engagement with the local setting. Corporate communication
and re-entry training activities increase the alignment of expectations
with reality, and raise re-entry satisfaction while diminishing re-entry
difficulties. Companies that prepare expatriates and their families for
coming home after global assignments are increasing the odds of
retaining these valuable employees, and of helping them make the
challenging adjustment to being home. In short, companies must work to
close the gap between expectations and reality for returning expatriates
(Caligiuri and Lazarova, 2001; Sievers, 1998).
The creation of a comprehensive repatriation program ensures that
the policies and agreements that were initially presented to an employee
is fully honoured. The need for regulated repatriation processes becomes
more critical as the number of employees that experience expatriation
increases. Repatriates have a right to be appropriately treated on their
return, and should be supported through the initial process of
re-acculturation.
Stage 4: Evaluation of the Repatriation Strategy
All facets of human resource management should be evaluated on a
regular basis, and this is particularly important for repatriation
strategies. However, there is little evidence of an extensive evaluation
of repatriation strategy outcomes. Reviews of strategy impact have
predominantly focused on turnover (e.g. Black and Gregersen, 1998; Chew,
2004; Stroh, 1995; Suutari and Valimaa, 2002). Yet, the impact of
repatriation extends much more widely, and can impact the
individual's work commitment, job satisfaction, work values, and
the wider perception of the expatriation process. The commercial
viability of the expatriation strategy relies on its positive image
amongst potential participants. Thus, it is essential that the
repatriation programme be regularly monitored.
The evaluation process can focus on four aspects: the impact of the
programs on repatriate retention, satisfaction and job commitment
(outcome measures); the participant's assessment of the
effectiveness of different strategies (process evaluation); the
identification of gaps in support that should be remedied (deficit
audit); and continuous benchmarking of the overall strategy against
other similar businesses (quality assessment). These results may be
important indicators of repatriation success. Black (1992), in his study
of 174 multinational repatriates, found a number of strong indicators in
the responses. In particular, repatriation and job adjustment were
strongly related to satisfaction with living and housing conditions.
Data collection can be undertaken at a re-entry review, which
ideally occurs at approximately two months after the repatriate's
return. This could be in the form of a debriefing interview with the
repatriation manager, or a standardized survey if there are large
numbers of repatriates. The evaluation should also be extended to
include the repatriate's spouse, so as to identify additional
issues. Napier and Peterson (1991) have provided one model for exploring
expatriate views. Their survey of employees and managers across
twenty-one US corporations identified three major expatriate concerns:
cultural re-entry, financial implications, and the nature of job
re-assignments. Research on expatriation impacts demonstrates the
insights that can be gleaned by questioning expatriates (e.g. Black,
1992; Forster, 2000; Morley, 2003; Napier and Peterson, 1991; Solomon,
1995).
The results of the expatriate review can offer important guidance
on desirable programs and policy changes. The results of such reviews
should be widely disseminated. Sharing feedback promotes open
communication on issues that need to be addressed, and leads to a
healthy work environment where repatriation is acknowledged as an
important company concern. The actual process of debriefing also
reassures the repatriate and their family members that the company is
concerned about their well-being. This message is an important one to
have during the resettlement process.
7. Conclusion
Companies with returning expatriates need to recognise their
vulnerabilities and their potentialities. Expatriates can be
significantly protected from re-entry culture shock through the
provision of effective policies, anticipatory agreements, and supportive
programs. In addition, their extended knowledge of corporate business
should be nurtured and fully utilized in the business setting. Companies
can send a clear signal to their repatriates that they are valued and
appreciated by singling out these employees for activities that call
upon their international experience. Repatriation should also involve
both the expatriate and the family in order to facilitate adjustment to
work and life. The repatriation program needs to be constantly reviewed
to ensure it effectively anticipates repatriation concerns. If
repatriates are taken for granted or ignored, it is at the
company's peril, for an effective repatriation strategy can lead to
a significant competitive advantage in the global market.
Attachment 1: POSSIBLE INCLUSIONS IN THE REPATRIATION POLICY
The repatriation policy should describe:
1. The value of expatriates while overseas and on returning.
2. The company commitment to maintaining expatriate satisfaction
while overseas and on return.
3. The rights and expectations of expatriates while away.
4. The rights and expectations of repatriates on return.
5. The provision of supportive services to enable these
transitions.
6. The planning of supportive services in advance to enable
appropriate management of the transitions.
7. The inclusion of expatriates in career planning programs.
8. The use of repatriates as mentors and guides to new expatriates.
9. Recognition of possible re-entry shock for the repatriate and
family.
10. Recognition of family and spouse needs in the programs
provided.
11. The provision of flexible and interactive programs for the
spouse and family.
References
Abueva, J.E. 2000. Many repatriation fail at huge cost to
companies. New York Times, May 17.
Adler, N. 1981. Re-entry: Managing cross-cultural transitions.
Group and Organizational Studies, 6(3): 341-356.
Adler, N. 1991. International Dimensions of Organizational
Behaviour, Boston, PW-Kent.
Allen, D. and Alvarez, A. 1998. Empowering expatriates and
organizations to improve repatriation effectiveness. Human Resource
Planning Society, 21(4): 29-39.
Birdseye, M.G. and Hill, J.S. 1995. Individual, organizational work
and environment influences on expatriate turnover tendencies: An
empirical study. Journal of International Business Studies, 22:787-813.
Black, J.S. 1992. Coming home: the relationship of expatriate
expectations with repatriation adjustment and job performance. Human
Relations, 45(Feb): 177-192.
Black, J.S., H.B. Gregersen, et al. 1990. Global Assignments:
Successfully expatriating and repatriating international managers. San
Francisco, CA, Jossey Bass.
Black, J.S., H.B. Gregersen, et al. 1992a. Toward a theoretical
framework of repatriation adjustment. Journal of International Business
Studies, 4 (Fourth quarter): 737-760.
Bonache, J. 2005. Job satisfaction among expatriates, repatriates
and domestic employees: The perceived impact of international
assignments on work-related variables. Personnel Review, 34(1): 110-124.
Borstorff, P., S. Harris, et al. 1997. Who'll go? A review of
factors associated with employee willingness to work overseas. Human
Resource Planning, 20(3): 29-41.
Brewster, C. 1997. International HRM: Beyond expatriation. Human
Resource Management, 7(3): 31.
Brewester, C. and Pickard, J. 1994. Evaluating expatriate training.
International Studies of Management & Organisation, 24(3): 18-29.
Caligiuri, P.M. and Lazarova, M. 2001. Strategic repatriation
policies to enhance global leadership development. Invited book chapter
for M. Mendenhall, T.
Kuehlmann, & G. Stahl (Eds.). Developing Global Business
Leaders: Policies, Processes and Innovations. Quorum Books.
Cagney, W.F. 1975. Executive reentry: The problems of repatriation.
Personnel Journal, 20:487-488
Carpenter, M.A., Sanders, W.G. and Gregersen, H.B. 2000.
International assignment experience at the top can make a bottom-line
difference. Human Resource Management, 39(2/3): 277-285.
Chew, J. 2004. Managing MNC expatriates through crises: A challenge
for International Human Resource Management. Research and Practice in
Human Resource Management, 12(2): 1-20.
Chowanec, G.D. and Newstrone, C.N. 1991. The Strategic Management
of International Human Resource. Business Quarterly, 56(2): 65-70.
Dowling, P.J. and Schuler, R.S. 1990. International Dimensions of
Human Resource Management. Boston, PWS-Kent.
Dowling, P.J. Schuler, R.S. and Welch, D.E. 1994. International
Dimensions of Human Resource Management, 2nd Edition. Belmont. Wadsworth
Publicity Company.
Engen, J.R. 1995. Coming Home. Training, 32(3): 37-40.
Fieldman, D.C. and Tompson, H.B. 1993. Expatriation, Repatriation,
and Domestic Geographical Relocation: An Empirical Investigation of
Adjustment to New Job Assignments. Journal of International Business
Studies, 24.
Fieldman, D.C. and Thomas, D.C. 1992. Career Management Issues
Facing Expatriates. Journal of International Business, 23(2): 271-293.
Forster, N. 2000. The Myth of the International Manager.
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 11 (1): 126-142.
Frazee, V. 1997. Welcome your repatriates home. Workforce: Global
Workforce Supplement, 5:24-28.
Gregersen, H.B. 1992. Commitments to a Parent Company and a Local
Work Unit during Repatriation. Personnel Psychology, 45(1): 29-36.
Gregersen, H.B. and Black, J.S. 1996. Multiple Commitments upon
repatriation: Japanese Experience. Journal of Management, 22(2):
209-230.
Hammer, M., Hart, W. and Rogan, R. 1998. Can you go home again? An
analysis of the repatriation of corporate managers and spouses.
Management International Review, 38(1): 67-86.
Hansen, F. 1997. Repatriation programs work. Compensation and
Benefits Review, 29(5): 14-15.
Harvey, M. 1989. Repatriation of corporate executives: An empirical
study. Journal of International Business Studies, (Spring): 131-144.
Hodgetts, R.M. and Luthans, F. 1997. International Management. New
York, The McGraw-Hill Companies.
Howard, C. 1974. The Returning Overseas Executive: Culture Shock in
Reverse. Human Resource Management, 13(2): 22-26.
Kendall, D.W. 1981. Repatriation: An Ending and a Beginning.
Business Horizons, 24(6): 21-25.
Klaff, L.G. 2002. The right way to bring expats home. Workforce,
81(7): 40-44.
Kramar, R., P. McGraw, et al. 1997. Human Resource Management in
Australia. Melbourne, Longman.
Laabs, J.J. 1996. HR pioneers explore the road less traveled.
Personnel Journal, 75, 2: (70-77).
Latta, G. 1999. Expatriate policy and practice: A ten-year
comparison of trends. Compensation and Benefits Review, 31 (4): 35.
Lazarova, M. 2001. Retaining repatriates: The role of
organizational support practices, Journal of Worm Business, 36(4):
389-401.
Mendenhall, M. and Oddou, G. 1991. International Human Resource
Management, Boston, PWS-KENT Publishing.
MacDonald, S. and Arthur, N. 2005. Connecting career management to
repatriation adjustment. Career Development International Journal,
10(2): 145-159. Molnar, D. and Loewe, M.G. 1997. Seven Keys to
international HR management. Human Resource Focus, New York 74(5):
11-12.
Mon, T., Born, M.P, Willemsen, M.E, and Van Der Molen, H.T. 2005.
Predicting Expatriate Job Performance for Selection Purposes: A
Quantitative Review. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36(5):
590-620.
Morley, M.J. 2003. The management of expatriates: contemporary
developments and future challenges. Journal of Managerial Psychology,
18(3).
Napier, N.K. and Peterson, R.B. 1991. Expatriate Re-entry: What do
Expatriates Have to Say? Human Resource Planning, 14(1): 26-27.
Oddou, G. 1991. Managing your expatriates: what the successful
firms do. Human Resource Planning, 14(4): 301-309.
O'Neil, G. L. and Kramar, R. 1995. Australian Human Resources
Management, Melbourne, Pittman.
Peak, M.H. 1997. Darned expensive to take for granted. Management
Review. New York, 86(1): 9.
Petersen, R., B. Sargent, et al. 1996. Corporate expatriate HRM
policies, internationalization and performance in the world's
largest MNC's. Management International Review, 36(3): 215-304.
Punnett, B.J. and Ricks, D.A. 1997. International Business, London,
Blackwell.
Rahim, A. 1983. A model for developing key expatriate executives.
Personnel Journal, 62(4): 312-317.
Riusala, K. and Suutari, V. 2000. Expatriation and careers:
perspectives of expatriates and spouses. Career Development
International Journal, 5(2): 81-90.
Scullion, H. and Brewster, C. 2001. The Management of Expatriates:
Messages from Europe? Journal of World Business, 36(4): 346-366.
Scullion, H. and Starkey, K. 2000. In search of the changing role
of the corporate human resource function in the international firm.
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 11 (6): 1061-1081.
Sievers, C. 1998. Work/family: key to a successful assignment. HR
Focus, March 75:3 pS9(2).
Solomon, C.M. 1995. Repatriation: up, down or out? Personnel
Journal, 74(1): 28-36.
Stroh, L.K. 1995. Predicting turnover among repatriates: Can
organizations affect retention rates? International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 6(2): 443-456.
Suutari, V. and Brewster, C. 2003. Repatriation: empirical evidence
from a longitudinal study of careers and expectations among Finnish
expatriates. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14(7):
1132-1151.
Suutari, V. and Valimaa, K. 2002. Antecedents of repatriation
adjustment: new evidence from Finnish repatriates. International Journal
of Manpower, 23(7): 617-634.
Swaak, R. 1997. Repatriation: A weak link in global HR. HR Focus,
74(4): 2.
Swaak, R.A. 1995. Expatriate failures: too much cost, too little
planning. Compensation and Benefits Review, 27(6, Nov/Dec): 47-56.
Tung, R.L. 1988. A Contingency framework of selection and training
of expatriates revisited. Human Resource Management Review, 8(1): 15.
Tung, R.L. 1988. Career issues in International Assignments. The
Academy of Management Executive, August p242.
Tung, R.L. 1998. American expatriates abroad: From neophytes to
cosmopolitans. Journal of Business, 33(2): 125-144.
Varner, I.I. and Palmer, T.M. 2002. Successful expatriation and
organisational Strategies. Review of Business, Jamaica; Spring, 23(2):
8-12.
by
Janet Chew
Australian Catholic University, North Sydney, Australia
Shelda Debowski
University of Western Australia, Crawley, Australia
Table 1: Components of an Effective Repatriation Agreement
Agreement Components
1. Specify the overseas posting period.
2. Incorporate a return incentive payment to compensate for
dislocation effects.
3. Provide assurance that, on return, a job will be:
* mutually acceptable
* have greater responsibility than that held previously
* is a promotion from that held previously
4. Six to twelve months prior to returning, arrange networking visits
for the expatriate and family to return home in order to increase
visibility with line and HR managers.
5. Develop repatriation programs to enable a smooth transition back
into the work setting.
6. Provide relocation benefits including pre-repatriation house
hunting and school search.
7. Shipment of personal goods should be expedited.
Table 2: The Features of an Effective Repatriation Program
Repatriation Program Features
1. Mentor program comprising the pairing of an expatriate with a
home office senior management colleague who will ensure effective
contact is maintained between the home office and the expatriate.
2. The provision of a support structure to facilitate family
reintegration into the home country.
3. A separate organisational unit and repatriation manager that
accepts primary responsibility for the specific needs of all
expatriates, and plans for their return in the future.
4. Provision of flexible career placement process, career tracking
and pathing systems that recognise and reward returning employees.
5. The conducting of a post assignment interview with the
expatriate and spouse to review their views of the assignment and
address any repatriation issues.
6. A company managed social event to welcome and recognise the
employee and family.
7. The provision of repatriation counseling or workshops to ease
adjustment (include family).
8. The provision of repatriate directory network to establish
contact with other repatriates.
9. The maintenance of the individual's personnel files, and
efficient transfer of these any new work location.
10. The use of repatriates as trainers for future expatriates.