A Kauffman Foundation site

Policy Forum Blog

The Policy Dialogue on Entrepreneurship Informs and connects thought leaders looking to understand policies that help entrepreneurs start companies, create jobs and re-start the economy.
Sign up to receive our weekly update!

RSS Feed Link

America's Loss is India's Gain

Posted by: Jonathan Ortmans on January 28, 2013 Source: Policy Dialogue on Entrepreneurship


This week we can expect President Obama to speak to immigration reform and a new immigration proposal to be unveiled in the Senate. I have discussed in this blog the importance of creating a U.S. Startup Visa for high skilled immigrants—but only in the context of America’s loss. We take a look today on what America's loss in terms of brainpower and innovation skills means for one nation—India.

In recent years, there has been a growing trend in the U.S. of Indian and Chinese highly skilled immigrants leaving to return to their home countries. These returnees are relatively young (35 and 37) and most of them hold Master's and PhD degrees in management, technology or science. In an often cited Kauffman Foundation study, 56.6 percent of Indian respondents indicated that they would be likely to start a business in the next five years, and 53.5 percent of them believed their best opportunities for entrepreneurship were in their home country. Is the Indian startup ecosystem leveraging the growth engine leaving the U.S.?

Beyond the high-skilled returnees, India of course has locally-trained talent. It is home to some of the most prestigious technology schools, such as the IITs (Indian Institutes of Technology). In 2007, the country doubled the number of engineers who graduated with bachelor's degrees from 125,000 in 2004. And the numbers have continued to grow. Clearly, there is a strong talent pool for innovation in India, not to mention the market size of this nation of 1.2 billion combined with rising salaries. This presents opportunities for startups to cater to various demands of the growing middle class segment, something where returnees bring valuable experience.

While Indian business remains concentrated among well-connected conglomerates that date back generations, the country has come a long way to support new business creation. Before 1991, the year India began to dismantle controls, lower tariffs and taxes, breaking state monopolies and opening the country to trade and foreign investment, Indian business success was almost strictly a function of licenses, government connections, and an understanding of the bureaucratic system. Reforms since 1991 put this economy among the promising BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India, and China). Market liberalization and the IT boom in the late ‘90s lead to significant waves of entrepreneurship in India. Take TV channels; India created over 400 channels in less than two decades. According to 2012 IMF data, India is the 11th largest economy in the world, the third largest in Asia, and the second largest among emerging nations.

Capital for entrepreneurs is still scarce, but a lot of early-stage venture funds have been coming from offshore investors. Once again, returnees bring enormous value to the creation of more elaborate global networks of angel and VC markets. For example, Mumbai Angels started in 2006 with just two investors and today there are 150. Other angel networks are popping up in Delhi and Bangalore. Also, several successful businesses are betting on the development of local technologies and have started incubators as well as venture capital and private equity funds (e.g. Infosys, Wadhawan Group and Wipro). There are also partnership building networks between investors like GSF India and the recently launched GSF Accelerator to offer mentoring and seed funding to tech startups across Mumbai, Delhi and Bangalore.

In terms of innovation, India is still punching far below its weight— something where it can again benefit from young returnees with science PhDs. The 2012 Policy Innovation Index shows that India lags behind Brazil and China in terms of overall innovation—enabling policies that create the conditions in which innovation can flourish. While it fares well in some areas composing the index, such as in R&D tax credits, other dimensions of innovation policy are holding it back. For example, India prohibits foreign investments in real estate, nuclear energy, railways and most agricultural activities, among other sectors. In terms of investments in higher education R&D, India is at the bottom of the Policy Innovation Index rank, with only 0.04 percent of its GDP allocated for this purpose (compared to Brazil’s 0.43% or top-ranking Sweden’s 0.79%). It also ranks well below other countries in terms of fostering local domestic market competition, which is vital to create the conditions in which new, entrepreneurial firms can flourish.

Not all challenges to startups in India will benefit from US returnees. While it is difficult to measure entrepreneurship accurately, let alone innovative entrepreneurship, if you take the number of new firms created per 1,000 workers employed in 2009, India has the lowest among the 55 countries studied in the Policy Innovation Index. By that measure, India created just 0.12 firms for every 1,000 workers employed, compared to 6.30 in China or 8.05 in the UK. Moreover, there is an apparent lack of growth among new business. PricewaterhouseCoopers and the Confederation of Indian Industry estimate that the small firms that exist add only an estimated 3.3 million jobs per year, which is not enough to accommodate the roughly 13 million people entering India's job market. The 2011 Legatum Institute survey of more than 2,000 Indian business owners and entrepreneurs in turn revealed that big companies are growing faster than small companies. Nearly half (48%) of all companies in India with 500 employees or more grew at a rate of 15% or more from 2010 to 2011, and 26% of those companies were growing at rates greater than 25%. In contrast, only 6% of companies with 1 to 49 employees grew at a rate of 25% or more. We can’t equate small firms with young firms, but this trend is nonetheless indicating that India’s economy is not as entrepreneurial as it could be.

Red tape and corruption might explain some of the low new business creation rates and the apparent lack of business growth among those outside big firm capitalism. By World Bank measures, the cost to start a business in India (measured as the percent of income per capita) is near prohibitive: 46.8 percent of average per-capita income. In terms of the regulatory environment for enforcement of private contracts, 46 procedures are necessary in India, and it takes 1,420 days. This translates into high costs and time-consumption for entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurs also consider the costs of failure, a likely probability for most business startups. In India, closing a business (i.e. resolving insolvency) takes four years. Overall, it is not easy to be an entrepreneur in India. Among the 183 economies studied by the World Bank´s Doing Business project, India ranks 132nd in terms of the overall ease of doing business.

Correcting these inefficiencies will not be easy given the climate of corruption. In the same 2011 Legatum Institute survey, more than 9 out of 10 entrepreneurs said they believe that corruption is a problem in India and approximately 80% of those interviewed believe that the problem is actually getting worse.

Nonetheless, some entrepreneurs are defying the odds and generating pressure for change from the bottom up—and those with U.S. experience in entrepreneur-led startup communities have much to contribute. There are a number of success stories of first-generation entrepreneurs showing that you don’t need to come from a Tata-like empire to build growth companies, such as Infosys' Narayana Murthy, Bharti Airtel's Sunil Mittal and WINIT´s Prakash Sreewastav, who took the entrepreneurial plunge and built fast growing companies from the ground up. The 2011 Legatum survey in fact revealed that the majority of current entrepreneurs (84 percent) perceive India as a good place to succeed, although the younger generation is less optimistic.

Beyond the anti-entrepreneurial incentives embedded in some of India’s policies and regulations, and the need for improvement in physical infrastructure, a big challenge for entrepreneurs in India is attracting talent. Most young professionals still prefer safer jobs at large companies. As a local business expert told ZDNetAsia, even if one percent of the roughly 200,000 engineers currently working in India’s R&D market decide to do something on their own, India would have a significant number of startups. Many call for better education to help prepare emerging young talent to become entrepreneurs and to break the cultural fear of failure. Here again is where returning nascent entrepreneurs from America bring great value.

India must clearly work to put effective regulations and policies in place to enable entrepreneurial and innovative activity to flourish. Its institutions must continue to shift to a new, more sustainable model of growth rather than catering to the needs of the big firms. And more programs like Startup Village, a recently inaugurated telecom incubator resulting from the public-private partnership, can help groom startups.

However, a lack of action in the U.S. on high skilled immigration reform is surely India’s gain. Last week, Canadian Minister Kenney announced his nation will launch its own Startup Visa on April 1, 2013, to recruit foreign startup talent. As startup entrepreneurs increasingly view the world as one market, I hope this week some of the U.S. chatter about “immigration reform” will remind Americans not just of our history as a melting pot, but that this is now an issue of global competitiveness as nations pursue entrepreneurs as net job creators who help grow economies.

Category:  Global  Tags:  IIT, GSF India, Policy Innovation Index, Legatum Institute,

2 Comments

RE: Americas Loss is Indias Gain
January 28, 2013 @ 06:58 PM
Gene said...
A start up company trying to answer the immigration entrepreneur is Blueseed. There plan is to anchor a cruise ship 12.5 mile off the California coast and host entrepreneurs with angel investors .
RE: Americas Loss is Indias Gain
March 03, 2013 @ 10:27 AM
Dr. Suresh Kumar said...
I am an India American immigrant entrepreneur. India has come a long way since I first came to the US in 1991. I personally know of many Indian American entrepreneurs who have returned back to India to take up the challenge of exploring new ideas/opportunities. Another important reason was the immigration related hurdles that seem to have exploded over the past 5 years. For example, the restrictions on H1 visas and delays in processing applications for permanent residency in the United States are especially severe on small entrepreneurial startups that need the services to provide highly skilled technology workers at a reasonable cost to exploit opportunities, innovate, and compete equally with mega-corporations. Faced with an immigration policy climate characterized by uncertainty, red tape, unreasonable delays, errors, and high cost, many high-growth entrepreneurs have no choice but to send work that could have been done by tax-paying workers in the United States to offshore locations. Entrepreneurs in the current study reported having to resort to sending work overseas since 2009 due to the steep increase in costs and the uncertainties involved in the H1 visa process. This short-sighted policy has resulted in high paying and tax generating jobs leaving the United States for offshore locations and had compounded the problems faced by the U.S. economy.
My research recommends the following policy changes:

a) Shifting the Focus of the Startup Visa to Skilled Non-Immigrant Workers and Foreign Students Already in the United States: Based on our finding that founders of high-growth firms in the current study came to the United States either as skilled workers under the H1 visa or as foreign students under the F1 visa, we recommend that a majority of the total visas under the StartUp Visa be reserved for these 2 groups not just foreign entrepreneurs. A relatively simple way to encourage H1/F1 visa holders to start new venture is by fast tracking their permanent residency application (green cards). Remember that entrepreneurs delayed starting their ventures until after they obtained their permanent residency, which was an important event that seemed to trigger the entrepreneurial intentions leading to the startup. The eligibility criteria for the fast-track to permanent residency under the StartUp Visa act should be based on the indictors of entrepreneurial potential, including entrepreneurial intentions, richness of prior work experience in the United States, and the extent of professional, social and financial embeddedness in United States. Evidence argues that those who successfully navigate being embedded in two cultures reap disproportionate results (Galbreath, et al. 2007; Leung 2001; Pare, et al. 2008).

b) Selection Criteria for Foreign Entrepreneurs: For those coming to the United States for the first time, weight has to be given to those who have a proven track record as serial entrepreneurs and those who are currently providing products and services to client in the United States. Due consideration has to be given to other factors that are critical to their eventual success in the U.S. including knowledge of technology tools, social media marketing, familiarity with the English language, and contacts with ethnic/professional networks in the United States.

c) Mandatory Training for Foreign Entrepreneurs: Our findings argue that work experience in the United States was the most critical factor in entrepreneurial success; we recommend that the Startup Visa Act has to have provisions wherein it be mandatory for foreign entrepreneurs to get specialized training that will help them quickly understand the socio-political, economic, legal, policy, and strategy framework for startups in the United States. Equally important is training that will help connect them with the entrepreneurial ecosystem of the United States, which includes vibrant ethnic and professional networks that support entrepreneurs. An easy way to implement this is via pre-existing training and mentoring programs such as those developed by organizations like the Kauffman Foundation, Startup Weekend, et al.

d) Revision of the Benchmarks for Measuring Startup Success: The requirement of the StartUp Visa Act of 2001 for raising capital from qualified investors in the United States has to be reconsidered. Raising capital is a time consuming and daunting task even for seasoned entrepreneurs and will be even more so for foreign entrepreneurs with limited exposure to the U.S. As was discussed previously all the entrepreneurs in the current study were able to grow high-growth ventures without reliance on capital from qualified investors or institutional loans. Instead of reliance on capital from qualified investors, we recommend that the benchmark of success for the entrepreneurs be the number of jobs created in the United States over a 5 year period. Our study shows that in every case, the new venture started slow and after about 4 years achieved rapid growth in terms of both revenues and number of employees. Based on this finding we recommend a lower target for years 1 thru 3, with an increase in years 4 and 5. In addition to job creation goals, we recommend a multi-dimensional scale to measure the success of the startup that includes the ability to attract experienced co-founders, the ability to attract corporate and government clients, and the ability to bootstrap, and the ability to build network ties with ethnic and professional networks.

Add a Comment

Search PDE

Policy Dialogue on Entrepreneurship Get Your Weekly Digest

Register today to receive news and updates from Entrepreneurship.org.

Email Newsletter Signup