'The persistent myth of high expatriate failure rates': a reappraisal

Abstract

While there is now a mature literature on many aspects of the management of employees on international assignments (IAs), there is still considerable controversy about the numbers of expatriates who actually fail in these. Traditionally, this has been defined as the number of staff who return home before the agreed end of an IA, because of poor work performance and/or personal problems. Employing this definition, the research described in this paper supports the view that expatriate failure rates (EFRs), among UK employees are, indeed, very low (on average, around 8 per cent). However, this article argues that this traditional definition has limitations and does not reveal the true extent of the problems which IAs can cause to some expatriates and their dependants both during their time abroad and after returning to the UK. The paper then goes onto argue that a broader definition of 'failure' is needed, which includes: an acknowledgement of the considerable stresses and strains experienced by a minority of staff who are under-performing on IAs; the 'poaching' of successful managers by other companies while they are abroad or at the end of their IAs; the often negative outcomes of repatriation experienced by many employees in recent years; the negative (and largely unreported) effects on some families and the career prospects of partners and negative views about the prospect of overseas postings in the future.