Information Age: Individual Job Outsourcing

Outsourcing has been largely thought as mainly company based commercial operations. However in the real world, given today’s deepening of the digital economy or information age, the application of outsourcing has been broadening to include individual operations.

The oxymoronic account  of where a company caught an employee  outsourcing one’s job, from CNN.com, which led to his termination, seems like a manifestation of such snowballing dynamic

After a U.S.-based "critical infrastructure" company discovered in 2012 its computer systems were being accessed from China, its security personnel caught the culprit ultimately responsible: Not a hacker from the Middle Kingdom but one of the company's own employees sitting right at his desk in the United States.

The software developer is simply referred to as "Bob," according to a case study by the U.S. telecommunications firm Verizon Business.

Bob was an "inoffensive and quiet" programmer in his mid-40's, according to his employee profile, with "a relatively long tenure with the company" and "someone you wouldn't look at twice in an elevator."

Those innocuous traits led investigators to initially believe the computer access from China using Bob's credentials was unauthorized -- and that some form of malware was sidestepping strong two-factor authentication that included a token RSA key fob under Bob's name.

Investigators then discovered Bob had "physically FedExed his RSA token to China so that the third-party contractor could log-in under his credentials during the workday," wrote Andrew Valentine, a senior forensic investigator for Verizon.

Bob had hired a programming firm in the northeastern Chinese city of Shenyang to do his work. His helpers half a world away worked overnight on a schedule imitating an average 9-to-5 workday in the United States. He paid them one-fifth of his six-figure salary, according to Verizon.

Some thoughts

Programmer Bob’s offense has really not been about outsourcing but of the unauthorized disclosure of what has been internal corporate affairs to a third party.

In the digital economy or the information age, non-contiguous work requirements enable outsourcing on an international scale. The non-sensitivity to geographic confines means that work can be delegated to a specialty agent wherever access to connectivity is present. This translates to job  decentralization or semi-autonomous jobs or jobs that allows for “home based” work or telecommutation.  I may add that semi-autonomous work may not really be “home based” or static work location but about mobility.

Deepening decentralization of industries and jobs will translate to decentralization of living areas. Thus, the incompatibility of mainstream concept of industrial age “urbanization” with decentralization.

Outsourcing, which contributes to the informal economy, should continue to grow as the world’s economy gravitates towards technology inspired specialization.

When College Education Isn’t Sufficient

Work place education matters more than a college degree, so argues Professor Alex Tabarrok at the Chronicle Review (hat tip Prof Mark Perry; bold emphasis mine)

The obsessive focus on a college degree has served neither taxpayers nor students well. Only 35 percent of students starting a four-year degree program will graduate within four years, and less than 60 percent will graduate within six years. Students who haven't graduated within six years probably never will. The U.S. college dropout rate is about 40 percent, the highest college dropout rate in the industrialized world. That's a lot of wasted resources. Students with two years of college education may get something for those two years, but it's less than half of the wage gains from completing a four-year degree. No degree, few skills, and a lot of debt is not an ideal way to begin a career.

College dropouts are telling us that college is not for everyone. Neither is high school. In the 21st century, an astounding 25 percent of American men do not graduate from high school. A big part of the problem is that the United States has paved a single road to knowledge, the road through the classroom. "Sit down, stay quiet, and absorb. Do this for 12 to 16 years," we tell the students, "and all will be well." Lots of students, however, crash before they reach the end of the road. Who can blame them? Sit-down learning is not for everyone, perhaps not even for most people. There are many roads to an education.

Consider those offered in Europe. In Germany, 97 percent of students graduate from high school, but only a third of these students go on to college. In the United States, we graduate fewer students from high school, but nearly two-thirds of those we graduate go to college. So are German students poorly educated? Not at all.

Instead of college, German students enter training and apprenticeship programs—many of which begin during high school. By the time they finish, they have had a far better practical education than most American students—equivalent to an American technical degree—and, as a result, they have an easier time entering the work force. Similarly, in Austria, Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands, Norway, and Switzerland, between 40 to 70 percent of students opt for an educational program that combines classroom and workplace learning.

In the United States, "vocational" programs are often thought of as programs for at-risk students, but that's because they are taught in high schools with little connection to real workplaces. European programs are typically rigorous because the training is paid for by employers who consider apprentices an important part of their current and future work force. Apprentices are therefore given high-skill technical training that combines theory with practice—and the students are paid! Moreover, instead of isolating teenagers in their own counterculture, apprentice programs introduce teenagers to the adult world and the skills, attitudes, and practices that make for a successful career.

Elites frown upon apprenticeship programs because they think college is the way to create a "well-rounded citizenry." So take a look at the students in Finland, Sweden, or Germany. Are they not "well rounded"? The argument that college creates a well-rounded citizen can be sustained only by defining well rounded in a narrow way. Is someone who can quote from the school of Zen well rounded? Only if they can also maintain a motorcycle. Well-roundedness comes not from sitting in a classroom but from experiencing the larger world.

The focus on college education has distracted government and students from apprenticeship opportunities. Why should a major in English literature be subsidized with room and board on a beautiful campus with Olympic-size swimming pools and state-of-the-art athletic facilities when apprentices in nursing, electrical work, and new high-tech fields like mechatronics are typically unsubsidized (or less subsidized)? College students even get discounts at the movie theater; when was the last time you saw a discount for an electrical apprentice?

Our obsessive focus on college schooling has blinded us to basic truths. College is a place, not a magic formula. It matters what subjects students study, and subsidies should focus on the subjects that matter the most—not to the students but to everyone else. The high-school and college dropouts are also telling us something important: We need to provide opportunities for all types of learners, not just classroom learners. Going to college is neither necessary nor sufficient to be well educated. Apprentices in Europe are well educated but not college schooled. We need to open more roads to education so that more students can reach their desired destination.

College education has been designed for the industrial age or the mass production political economy.

The deepening of the information age, marked by the increasing transition towards niche markets, will lead to leaner but highly specialized business processes that will be reflected on the evolving dynamics of organizational structures.

Job requirements will thus be driven by specialization. And meeting these would translate a change in the delivery medium of educational content, which are likely to move away from classroom models towards personalized education (such as P2P collaborative tutoring, and many other online models) or the demassification of education.

And in this regards Mr. Tabarrok’s observation of education derived from apprenticeship/vocational/technical degree or workplace education will be magnified.

It is also important to point out that taxpayer spending on current public educational programs will become increasingly irrelevant.

Do Filipinos Need a New Attitude on Entrepreneurship?

I received a promotional email for an entrepreneurship seminar which comes with a column from Brian Quebengco entitled “Championing Philippine Ideas: The Rise of Silicon Valley in the Philippines”

Mr. Quebengco writes, (no link included in the email),

It is not an evolution that we need, nor is it a revolution. Rather, what we need is a transformation. Since the glory days of Semi Conductors and the Filipino entrepreneurs that championed them, we have evolved a great deal up to our present state. And as we are witnessing right now, a revolution in technology and communication has made the world flat. But what is lacking, and I feel the most important, is for us, the individual Filipino, to transform our attitude and ways to give rise to the Filipino Entrepreneur. We don't need mechanisms, infrastructures, or even the presence of a strong venture capital community to do this. In my own view, business is about people first, and everything else second. That transformation must and can only start with the individual Filipino.

He further says entrepreneurs should be individually motivated which should permeate to culture and subsequently to infrastructure. And from this he advocates the promotion of “a new kind of Enterpreneur”, one who will “challenge the global arena”.

I am delighted that there are local experts advocating entrepreneurship which functions as the cornerstone for any market economy.

However, I would suggest that any “new kind of entrepreneur” hardly matches the operational concept of entrepreneurship.

Entrepreneurs are those who allocate factors of production (labor, capital goods and natural resources) in the service of consumers. (Mises wiki)

Further, entrepreneurs employ “discovery” or “alertness” to profit opportunities in scanning the market horizon which can bring about innovation, better quality of goods or services or cheaper prices. (Israel M. Kirzner)

So aside from Silicon Valley which he seems to see as a paradigm to emulate, homegrown entrepreneurs are the balut vendors, carinderia operators, laundry services and etc… to the bigwig who compete internationally like Jollibee, San Miguel Brewery and others.

Each of them offers specific goods or services to serve their consumers in return for profit opportunities. These voluntary exchanges constitute the free markets.

What I am trying to say is that the marketplace hardly operates on “new” entrepreneurs founded on “new attitudes” but rather on individual specialization.

As the great Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises wrote, (bold emphasis mine)

The selection of the market does not establish social orders, castes, or classes in the Marxian sense. Nor do the entrepreneurs and promoters form an integrated social class. Each individual is free to become a promoter if he relies upon his own ability to anticipate future market conditions better than his fellow citizens and if his attempts to act at his own peril and on his own responsibility are approved by the consumers. One enters the ranks of the promoters by spontaneously pushing forward and thus submitting to the trial to which the market subjects, without respect for persons, everybody who wants to become a promoter or to remain in this eminent position. Everybody has the opportunity to take his chance. A newcomer does not need to wait for an invitation or encouragement from anyone. He must leap forward on his own account and must himself know how to provide the means needed.

It must be understood too that the entrepreneurship ethos is also hardly acquired from formal educational training.

Again from von Mises, (highlights added)

In order to succeed in business a man does not need a degree from a school of business administration. These schools train the subalterns for routine jobs. They certainly do not train entrepreneurs. An entrepreneur cannot be trained. A man becomes an entrepreneur in seizing an opportunity and filling the gap. No special education is required for such a display of keen judgment, foresight, and energy. The most successful businessmen were often uneducated when measured by the scholastic standards of the teaching profession. But they were equal to their social function of adjusting production to the most urgent demand. Because of these merits the consumers chose them for business leadership.

There is NO holy grail to successful entrepreneurship, as it takes sustained “keen judgment, foresight, and energy” to compete in the marketplace, even in the global arena.

What needs to be transformed is NOT the individual attitude towards entrepreneurship but rather the Filipinos’ seeming dependence on political means of dispensing economic opportunities.

In the environment where...

-taxes are high,

-red tapes are byzantine,

-bureaucracy is bloated

-regulatory compliance costs are numerous, time consuming and burdensome,

-corruption is rampant,

-competition is restricted,

-economic opportunities are distributed as political concessions (subsidies, monopolies, private-public partnership, cartel, and etc.)

-redistribution programs are plentiful (which essentially transfers productive resources to non-productive activities and at worst, induces people toward entitlements and subsequently takes away the drive for entrepreneurship)

-and many more,

...so even if most Filipinos would want to become entrepreneurs they can’t. That’ because the Philippine government (regardless of who is in power) prevents them from doing so. The cost of doing business or the risk premium is prohibitive enough to require high hurdle rates for entrepreneurs to generate decent returns.

All these signify as the Filipinos’ aversion to free markets which is what genuinely inhibits the Filipino entrepreneurial discovery process from taking hold.

Markets in Everything: China’s Village Specializes in Breeding Snakes

Markets emerge when people discover economic value in specific goods or services.

In China, cuisine and medicinal demand for snakes has led to a village specializing in snake breeding.

From Reuters,

This sleepy village nestled in the heart of vast farmland in China's eastern Zhejiang province hides a deadly secret.

A step into the homes of any of the farming families here brings visitors eye-to-eye with thousands of some of the world's most feared creatures -- snakes, many of them poisonous.

Cobras, vipers and pythons are everywhere in Zisiqiao, aptly known as the snake village, where the reptiles are deliberately raised for use as food and in traditional medicine, bringing in millions of dollars to a village that otherwise would rely solely on farming.

"As the number one snake village in China, it's impossible for us to raise only one kind of snake," said Yang Hongchang, the 60-year-old farmer who introduced snake breeding to the village decades ago.

"We are researching many kinds of snakes and the methods of breeding them."...

Today, more than three million snakes are bred in the village every year by the 160 farming families.

Snakes are renowned for their medicinal properties in traditional Chinese medicine and are commonly drunk as soup or wine to boost the person's immunity.

Deepening of Information Age: More Proof of Structural Changes in Job Markets

With the deepening of the information age, jobs will be characterized by increasing specialization, as said in many occasions in this post, such as here here and here

Here is an anecdotal proof provided by a large US manpower agency.

From the Wall Street Journal Blog (bold highlights mine)

Joerres said the global skills shortage applied particularly to technical areas, like specialized trades, but also sales staff. “There is still unemployment, but companies are having a difficult time finding the people they need to fill their positions. As the world is becoming more technical, the sales staff are having to become more technical, too,” Joerres said.

The shortage also applied to laborers, especially in developing markets. “You cannot just throw people at production to get more output,” Joerres said. “With the use of (computer numerical control, or CNC) machines, for example, it is more difficult to find the right people.”

ManpowerGroup’s sixth annual talent shortage survey, to be published Thursday, will show that persistent talent shortages across many geographies and industry sectors are frustrating employers who struggle to find qualified talent amid an oversupply of available workers.

And this has been a worldwide phenomenon. From the same article (bold highlights mine)

Although European countries aren’t yet feeling such an acute impact of talent shortages, the U.S. has seen a considerable uptick in the number of employers who can’t find the talent they need, Joerres said.

India now has the second-highest problem with skilled labor shortages. “The number of companies in India reporting difficulty filling vacancies is second only to Japan,” Joerres said.

“India is a big place with lots of people but there’s a shortage of assurance engineers, people who can read blueprints, designers and (computer-aided design, or CAD) designers.”

Manpower, based in Milwaukee, is looking to expand its operations in emerging markets that make up around 15% of its sales, which reached $5.07 billion in the first quarter of 2011.

The more the specialization, the more aggregate based statistics will become flawed and unreliable.

So when politicians and their ‘expert’ apologists speak about solving unemployment with use of aggregates, expect that these approaches to fall short because they are mostly likely addressing the wrong (industrial age based) issues.

Commodities And The Good Life

In a book review, the ever brilliant Matt Ridley narrates how commodities has contributed to economic progress and our good life.

An excerpt…

The discovery of the elements shadows and to some extent explains this evolving history of specialisation. The ancients knew of just seven metals: gold, silver, copper, tin, iron, lead and mercury. By giving each specialised roles, they improved their living standards—tin for hardening bronze, lead for moulding, silver for coinage and so on. By the modern era only one more metal—zinc—had joined them (although platinum was known to natives of the Americas). But then came a steady flow of new metals, each of which finds its particular role in technology and society: tungsten for hardness, aluminium for lightness, chrome for polish, neodymium for magnets, barium for medicine. Each finds its niche as surely as each profession and vocation does in human society. Just as our story is one of specialisation, so the story of chemistry is one of purification.

Each metal marches into our lives along a path from novel to banal, says Aldersey-Williams. Aluminium was once so difficult to make that Napoleon III used aluminium cutlery for only his most favoured guests and gave his son, the Prince Imperial, an aluminium rattle. Then it became so cheap that it was considered, well, cheap. Titanium, once rare and exotic, is becoming ubiquitous. For niobium and tantalum, Aldersey-Williams writes, “the journey is just beginning.” This is a tantalising thought. There are so many elements whose talents we have barely begun to use.

Matt Ridley: When Ideas Have Sex

Great stuff from Matt Ridley, watch it....

US Unemployment: It’s Partly About Skills-Jobs Mismatch

It isn’t true that unemployment in the US is all about the lack of opportunities.

Instead a big part of this, aside from regulatory uncertainties, is the mismatch of required skills relative to the available jobs.

According to the Wall Street Journal,(all bold emphasis mine)

Employers and economists point to several explanations. Extending jobless benefits to 99 weeks gives the unemployed less incentive to search out new work. Millions of homeowners are unable to move for a job because the real-estate collapse leaves them owing more on their homes than they are worth.

The job market itself also has changed. During the crisis, companies slashed millions of middle-skill, middle-wage jobs. That has created a glut of people who can't qualify for highly skilled jobs but have a hard time adjusting to low-pay, unskilled work like the food servers that Pilot Flying J seeks for its truck stops....

Matching people with available jobs is always difficult after a recession as the economy remakes itself. But Labor Department data suggest the disconnect is particularly acute this time around. Since the economy bottomed out in mid-2009, the number of job openings has risen more than twice as fast as actual hires, a gap that didn't appear until much later in the last recovery. The disparity is most notable in manufacturing, which has had among the biggest increases in openings. But it is also appearing in other areas, such as business services, education and health care....

Longer-term trends are at play. For one, the U.S. education system hasn't been producing enough people with the highly specialized skills that many companies, particularly in manufacturing, require to keep driving productivity gains. "There are a lot of people who are unemployed, but those aren't necessarily the people employers are looking for," says David Autor, an economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

In the transition to the information age, the shape of investment and hiring would pronouncedly be different as it will involve more specialized “local knowledge” skills and deepened division of labor.

Government intervention (stimulus, unemployment benefits, bailouts, obamacare) has kept the labor market from the adjustment process that should have met these “new” realities. Thus, additional government interventions won’t help.

And the recent resignation of the head of the Council of Economic Advisers to President Obama, Mrs. Christina Romer, appear to be a revelation of the failed Keynesian policies of the Obama regime.