O artykule
Article Category: Conceptual Paper
Data publikacji: 16 cze 2020
Zakres stron: 140 - 158
Otrzymano: 25 lut 2019
Przyjęty: 08 mar 2020
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/ijme-2020-0011
Słowa kluczowe
© 2020 Michał Młody et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Figure 1
Reshoring premises in the luxury sector in the respective luxury pyramid tiers
| Luxury – home production base as the core value. Offshoring activities kept secret, reshoring communicated only when offshore production is publicly disclosed and condemned. | Luxury – home production base as one of the core values. No need to reshore: assembly at brand heritage country, control over SC in producer's hands. Producer is the brand owner | Bringing the mining of gemstones, silver, gold, etc. home not possible. Local design and production add value mostly to niche – local brands. | |
| Bringing production home (back-reshoring) adds COO value; near-reshoring regains control over SC, makes SC more flexible and consumer demand responsive | Defragmented SC; production dispersed all over the world, many suppliers concentrated around assemblies. Assemblies placed in lower-labor-cost regions. Some finishing activities, aimed at changing COO into luxury home base, visible. | Production place not regarded as very important, offshored mainly to Far East countries. The brand owners are mostly distributors, to a much-lesser extent, producers themselves. Some early signs of near-reshoring visible, mainly due to quality problems. The consumers’ attention is mainly on the gems’ origin, although SC sustainability plays an important role. | |
| Reshoring drivers are mostly push factors: the method of regaining control over the SC, diminish the risk of international SC, transport costs, and time etc. Brand's COO is usually outside the traditional luxury home base; Far East production location accepted as a price concession for accessible luxury | More often near-reshoring than back-reshoring drivers both push and pull factors: the method of tightening control over the SC, diminish the risk of international transport costs | Reshoring drivers mostly are push factors; the method of regaining control over the SC, diminish the risk of international SC, transport costs and time, more flexible and consumer demand–responsive SC |
Examples of back-reshoring and near-reshoring
| United Kingdom | China | United Kingdom | 2015–2018 |
Control over the SC Little attractiveness of host countries |
“Made-in” effect Risk of brand counterfeiting |
||
| United Kingdom | China, Far East | United Kingdom | 2014–2015 |
“Made-in” effect Brand value |
|||
| Italy | China | Italy | 2014–2017 |
Production cost increase in offshore locations Delivery time and logistics costs Organizational flexibility Poor quality of offshore production Proximity to customers |
- “Made-in” effect | ||
| Italy | China | Italy, CEE | 2014–2015 |
Delivery time Organizational flexibility Control in their SC |
- “Made-in” effect | ||
| Italy | Croatia | Italy | 2015–2016 |
Product/process innovation Loyalty to the home country |
- “Made-in” effect | ||
| Italy | Romania | Italy | 2015 | - Poor quality of offshored production | - “Made-in” effect | ||
| US | China | US | 2015 |
Mistakes in offshore location Poor quality of offshore production Unattractiveness of the offshore market The occasional catastrophes |
- “Made-in” effect | ||
| France | India | France | 2013–2016 (France and Italy) |
Delivery time and logistics costs Poor quality of offshore production Proximity to customers Unattractiveness of the offshore market |
“Made-in” effect/ Sustainability/corporatesocial responsibility |
||
| US | Japan | US | 2017 |
Proximity to market Automation/technology Ecosystem synergies Manufacturing/engineering joint innovation (R&D) |
- Image/brand | ||
| United Kingdom | Austria | United Kingdom | 2017, 2018 |
Proximity to market Technological innovation kept at home factory |
- Image/brand | ||