To: Stock Farmer who wrote (64495 ) 9/13/2003 11:28:04 AM From: Aggie Respond to of 77397 John, hello, A very good post. I work in a completely different discipline, one which was embraced the idea of overseas postings and development for nearly a century now: Oil and Gas. As an industry group we are perhaps a bit further into the cycle you portray. I have been working overseas worldwide for about 15 years now, and I have a couple of observations on your post: Agree completely on cycling of foreign talent through the mother ship. The oil business has been doing this for years, but it carries with it the understanding that the lower cost of wages is offset at least partially by the higher cost of transplant, training and development. In my experience only the top 5 - 10 % percentile performance people are worth exporting due to this - however it adds demonstrably to the strengths of the company. Taken further, the people who are exported and developed (but not advanced through the ranks quickly enough) are not usually too keen to return to the native land to distribute their knowledge and experience to benefit the local economies. This concept (pollination to benefit the homeland) usually features prominently in the business-to-government business agreements, whereby the company agrees to limit the number of expatriate staff in order to develop the local staff. However, once the local staff can compete on the world stage, they usually prefer to do so because the money's much better. This is the case where I am working now (Caribbean / S America). The industry here is populated with lots of expatriates because trained locals are scarce on the ground - they're working worldwide for movie star wages. This has been going on for at least 40 years here locally, and it shows no sign of abatement. Regards to all, Aggie