PwC’s 2012 Survey of Global Mobility Policies reports that companies are adopting new non-traditional workforce mobility programmes, such as frequent business travel; they are also relying on commuter and short-term assignments in place of longer-term assignments.
These new programmes are also broader in reach, affecting more than 10% of employees, compared to traditional short- and long-term programs that impact only 1%.
The survey, which examines corporate mobility programmes over the decade 2002-2012, notes that companies are increasingly committed to reviewing and updating their employee mobility programs; half (50%) of participants reported that they are focused on refining their policies, while 48% want to simplify administration. Ten years ago the top two areas of focus were cost reduction and regional policy development.
“In today’s highly competitive global marketplace, the structure and appropriateness of global mobility policies can significantly impact your organisation’s workforce,” said Eileen Mullaney, principal and US Global Mobility Consulting leader the International Assignment Services (IAS) practice of PwC US.
“These days it is all about choice. Mobility packages should offer multiple options so business leaders as well as the employees can choose what works best for their specific situations or interests.”
She added that changes in mobility programmes reflect the need to match evolving economic and workforce demands. Increasing business globalisation and activity in emerging markets, younger employees seeking international work opportunities early and often in their careers, as well as a focus on developing future leaders with global mobility experience are leading companies to take a more strategic approach to mobility that better aligns the programs with business growth objectives and longer-term talent and career development plans.
According to the survey, the demographics of mobility programme participants have broadened to become less focused on employees who come from headquarters locations or who are at the executive level; for example, less than half of participants came from headquarters in 2012, compared to 80% in 2002. There has also been a marked decline in executive-level assignments (more than 60% since 1992) in favour of developmental assignments and technical and subject matter expert roles.
