Lure of country of origin: an exploratory study of ex-host country nationals in India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The present study was designed to investigate the factors that prompt ex-host country nationals (EHCNs) to return to their country of origin, specifically, India. In order to identify specific factors that guide the decision to return, we examined several categories of reasons why members of the Indian diaspora who have lived/worked abroad may choose to return to India. Design/methodology/approach Using a sample of 98 executives from Southern India, this exploratory study sheds light on the emerging phenomenon of “brain circulation” advanced by Saxenian (2005) where highly qualified professionals (human talent, in short) ply between their country of origin (COO) and country of residency (COR). The authors investigate (i) their overall impression of their COO, (ii) the reasons they believe their company transferred them to India in the event of company-sponsored relocations, (iii) the impediments they face in performing their jobs in their COO, and (iv) their level of satisfaction with various aspects of their assignment, whether company-sponsored or self-initiated assignments. Findings The findings of this study indicate that EHCNs were driven by several unique factors in their decision to return to their COO, including (i) quality of life, (ii) better career opportunities, (iii) remuneration and (iv) family reasons. Research limitations/implications The findings of this study should help scholars develop theoretical models that can help explain the factors that determine the decision-making process of EHCNs related to returning to their COO. Furthermore, while our study was conducted in India, the factors guiding the decisions of the EHCNs are clearly universal, such as quality of life and opportunities for self. Practical implications Overall, the EHCNs in our sample were happy with their decision to return to live and work in India, thus suggesting that it would not be very problematic for the Indian government to attract them to return home to satisfy the growing demand for human talent associated with inward and outward foreign direct investment to/from India. Originality/value Given the Indian government's continuing efforts to attract qualified EHCNs to return to India and contribute to the growth of the economy, our study offers specific insights into what motivates individuals to return to their COO.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".