[ad_1]
The announcement, a few days ago, that Dyson, one of the UK's most innovative and successful companies with an annual business turnover of more than 4 billion pounds sterling (5, US $ 25 billion), transferred its headquarters from the United Kingdom to Singapore. the United Kingdom but throughout Asia.
Dyson started producing vacuums in Chippenham, UK, in 1993 before moving to Malmesbury two years later. It has invested millions of dollars on the site, three times more than its British workforce by 2018, with 1,100 employees in Singapore, 1,300 in Malaysia, 1,000 in China and 800 in the Philippines.
However, the news of the latest Dyson change has been reported and commented on in various ways, particularly in the UK. This is the case even of the leading economic newspaper, whose title of the first page is disappointing and unfortunately biased: "The sponsor of Brexit Dyson moves his headquarters to Singapore."
Quite simply because Dyson is a Brexit supporter, several members of Parliament rushed to condemn him for "hypocrisy", "treason" and to point out the gloomy challenges posed to businesses after Brexit.
Therefore, it is interesting and illustrative to examine the importance of this movement in the context of its size, why it occurs and to badyze the possible "effects of Brexit" and their impact on other companies.
First, the size of the move. It turns out that only two executives – the chief financial officer and the head of legal affairs – are moving to Singapore and that no work will be lost. Of course, any future recruitment of new staff will be in Singapore and not in the UK.
Dyson still employs 4,000 people in the UK, its heart and soul, which are essential for future research and development facilities, which require highly skilled staff, engineers and scientists. Dyson announced this week that it would spend £ 200 million in new buildings and testing facilities in Hullavington, £ 44 million in office costs, the installation of new laboratories in Malmesbury and an investment of £ 31 million. pounds for young undergraduates at his university. the same site.
Second, why is this movement happening? To situate this in the context of international and global affairs, it is interesting to revisit some of Dyson's recent decisions and announcements. We can get a glimpse of Dyson's refocusing on his business. This includes the closure of the British manufacturing industry and its move to Malaysia in 2003, particularly in the Far East, where many suppliers were established, while simultaneously developing research and development in the UK.
Dyson has announced a 250 million pound extension in 2016 from its current headquarters, which has tripled its workforce in the UK. A year later, a 517-acre (209-hectare) campus was inaugurated as part of its mbadive £ 250bn investment. It plans to double its British workforce to support the development of new battery products, robotics and artificial intelligence.
Then, there was the most recent announcement, in 2018, of the construction of his new electric car in Singapore, still based on the availability of technical expertise, engineering talent, chains of And regional sourcing and proximity to key target markets. So this current announcement should not have been a surprise.
It should be noted that for the markets and sales of Dyson, the United Kingdom represents only 4% of annual sales. We may want to think about why. On the other hand, there is a growing Asian market for high quality Dyson premium products that are well-liked by rising middle clbades who are willing to pay for high-end, well-designed and innovative products, not just the cheapest.
Third, the too easy and lazy line "caused by Brexit" is, of course, counter-factual. There is also the causal link and the correlation point. As the history of Dyson makes clear, British and British investments, expansion and relocations took place before Brexit and since the vote.
As the company makes clear, this decision has nothing to do with Brexit. It's rather because of a keen business sense that James Dyson and his leadership are well known. He has made it one of the best known, admired and renowned inventors and entrepreneurs in the UK.
Finally, it is necessary to dissuade politicians partisans to mark points without interest, by saying without foundation that the companies are separated and that the investments are dried up.
Foreign direct investment in the UK continued and around 7% of international investors increased their investment last year since the EU referendum.
At best, this story shows the unrecognized confirmation bias and desirability of politicians and commentators, and worse, their ignorance. This important debate deserves better.
Chris Rowley is visiting scholar at Kellogg College of Oxford University and Professor Emeritus at the City of Cbad Business School, at the University of London. He is a leading figure in the study of employment and human resource management, trade and management in Asia.
[ad_2]
Source link
