솔직한 Mulligan의

시 센터 위치에 있는 높 비용 사무실, 공장 및 창고에서 나갈 것이다 강요는 중국에 있는 걸음에서, 계속하. 비용 아래로 기업 전략을 위한 급료 A 건물, 18% 평균 급료 인상 년 에 년 및 강요를 위한 상승 부동산 가격의 조합은, 다른 몇몇 선택이 다는 것을 보증한다. 1 플러스 중국 전략은 전략이 새로운 사무실을 세놓기의 China.The 비용에 있는 항상 적어도 1개의 위치를 포함하기 중국에 있는 어떤 도시든지에 있는 교외 위치에 있는 공장이 일반적으로 더 낮기 때문에 당신을 단지 이제까지는 가지고 간다, 그러나 직원 감손의 비용은 아무 움직임나에 안으로 인수 분해되어야 한다. 움직임은 불가피할지도 모른다 직원 손실은 아주 높을 수 있다, 그러나 당신이 고려할 때, 이 손실의 비용은 사업의 정상적인 비용의 한 부분으로 받아들여져야 한다.

변화 일

교외로 움직임의 일반적인 결과는 그들의 회사가 그들의 의견에서 그들 도시의 중앙 비즈니스 지역에 있는 완전하게 좋은 위치에서 움직이기 것을, 다짜고짜로, 결정했기 때문에 두집히는, 저 도시의 교외에 탈출구언짢은 직원의 높은 백분율이다.

당신은 직원이 다만 frustrated 보다는 더 많은 것일 것이기 때문에 움직임의 앞에 이것에 대하여 생각할 필요가 있다. 그들은 수시로 철처하게 격렬할 것이다. 어떤을 위해, 새로운 사무실에 감형 또는 공장은 일 당 여행 시간의 2 까지 시간을 추가할 것이다. Employees will be both angry that this is happening, and incredulous at the blindness to the fact that a resignation letter will be in HR’s office just as soon as they can find a new job; back in the city.

Low income staff is particularly susceptible to the job-change scenario. They are forced to move from a metropolitan area, with high job availability, to an area where job accessibility is markedly decreased. The kinds of jobs that are open to them in the suburban location are much lower paid, and their normally limited options suddenly seem very limited. Professional staff will often go along with the move because of the career potential in the new location.

In contrast, the cost of commuting is a high percentage of income for low income workers, and after the move this cost is sometimes the straw that breaks the camel’s back. Low-income, low-skills workers have fewer options but they do have options. 

Right Country, Wrong Location

There are multiple reasons why companies found themselves in the wrong location. The first is that many came to China early, when cities were much smaller, and many factories were still located in central business districts. The speed at which Chinese cities have grown is no less than phenomenal, and hard to fathom if you have not been here long enough.
Some stayed put until cost pressures became intolerable. This took some time to pan out, especially for those who chose to locate in older buildings. Prices in these buildings were slower to rise. In the end the building was often torn down, and replaced by a better, more expensive one.

Another reason is that for many companies it was just easier to stay put, even when costs rose. Moving would have meant having to face the prospect of losing many staff, and for smaller companies or service partnerships, this could prove fatal. 

In a good many cases, companies that invested in Representative Offices in China were not necessarily as committed to the market as they might have appeared. The Representative Office model allowed them to test out the market, with a minimum investment in a small office in the city centre. Eventually that model ran out of steam and they had to bite the bullet. As the legal situation in China improved, there came a time for many companies when an investment in a plant or R&D centre made sense. This usually coincided with a change in the laws covering their industry.

A newer reason for moving out to the suburbs is a very positive one. Companies that have done well in the China market, and who have a strong R&D component, have decided to go the whole hog and shift to a campus model. This model offers many benefits to employees, not least of which is the lesser pollution and the slower pace of life.

It’s particularly good for new graduate hires because the campus model is who they think they are, and where they deserve to work. The lifestyle fit is good because most universities in China tend to be located in the suburbs anyway. New graduate employees have an easier transition to the world of work.

The pressure of a city commute is not necessarily a welcome burden when you have spent the previous 10-15 years walking from home to school or university.

Frank Mulligan, Talent Software