"We have a forward-looking strategy," says Arup Gupta, president, TCS America, claiming that he will provide more training and job opportunities in the US. He plans to create 50 local jobs in Buffalo by year-end—a small beginning compared to his workforce of 7,000 here, but still a start. Infosys US chief S.D. Shibulal told Outlook he had plans to increase local hires. Infosys' global internship programme InStep takes young graduates to its Bangalore headquarters to work with the top management. It has tied up with the Wharton School of Business for a joint award for excellence in business. When quizzed why he wasn't publicising this to the American public, he said that NASSCOM was the best equipped for the job. NASSCOM too has a PR firm but its footprints are yet vaguely defined.
India needs to augment the PR exercise with well-researched data about its economy. Indian ambassador Lalit Mansingh, who completes his tenure in April, has tried to keep up but hasn't been as visible or audible as needed, according to sources on Capitol Hill. He has held two strategy sessions with Indian IT heads to figure out the best way forward. So far, everyone seems satisfied to let US firms and associations take the lead in Washington."There is a greater chance they (US politicians) will listen to American CEOs," says an Indian diplomat. "It shouldn't be seen as an India issue. American firms are making attempts to change the parameters of the debate." Karnik also says that "we are not campaigning or lobbying because, in the US, economics always dominates politics and good sense will prevail."
But the supporters among American corporates are hampered by a lack of data. They want figures on how outsourcing has created jobs and enhanced US exports. Infosys alone uses 25,000 licensed Microsoft products. Figures on Motorola phones and US computer hardware used by Indian IT giants have neither been compiled nor delivered to the "Friends of India" who are lobbying to stem the anger. Tarun Das, director general of cii, who visited the US last week for a round of urgent meetings with top US lawmakers, administration officials and CEOs, was told that India needed a "major public relations" effort. The US Congress has no readily available data on how the Indian economy has opened up. That is why data delivery in easy, ready sound bites is of critical importance.
Sadly, the urgency is still missing. The reason: leading Indian providers feel that things are still hunky dory and there is no need to get alarmed. Despite indicating his worries, Karnik's analysis is that "so far the business impact is zero". Agrees Sanjiv Agarwal, CEO, Daksh e-services, one of India's leading BPO providers: "Leading companies like us are clocking 100 per cent growth. We have our platter full and we see no change in the upward curve in the foreseeable future."
Agarwal's confidence stems from the fact that the still-incipient BPO sector in India has been growing at almost 60-70 per cent. According to IDC figures, the Indian BPO revenues will jump over three times to $12 billion in 2006. Daksh itself has doubled its revenues to $60 million this fiscal and targets to grow by at least 80 per cent the next fiscal.
Others contend that the BPO fears are politically motivated and highly exaggerated. Even the figures of job losses are not alarming at all. NASSCOM's calculations indicate that only 13 per cent of the 3 million jobs lost in the US in the last three years have been because of outsourcing. The rest were due to manufacturing jobs moving out of the US to countries like China. In addition, exl's Talwar says that no one is likely to disturb the outsourcing applecart. "With the gains the corporates have recorded through outsourcing, can any government in the US put a rule to stop this?" he questions. Industry estimates indicate that US companies saved $6 billion in the last four years by offshoring to India. During the same period, they added 1,25,000 jobs, helped by these savings which enabled them to prevent layoffs.
Whatever the arguments on either side, at the end, it will have to be a give-and-take between the two countries. If New Delhi wants Washington's support on the issue, it will have to accede to some of the latter's demands. After spoiling the fun at the WTO negotiations in Cancun last year, India has refused to sign the multilateral government procurement agreements. That has made the US feel that while Indian companies seek government contracts abroad, their country is closing its doors for others. Agrees Karnik: "We are on a weak wicket here. Unless the Indian government accedes to the government procurement agreements it will be difficult to promote our cause in the US." In election year in both the countries, that will be a tough call to take.
