Barriers to international mobility: How GM can shape successful outcomes

The previous post in this series covered how adaptation issues for employees or their families are becoming an increasingly common cause of moves ending earlier than planned. These challenges, ranging from cultural barriers to family-related stress, can result in costly early returns, strained local teams and wasted investment. But what can global mobility (GM) teams do to mitigate these issues?

Making global mobility part of the talent conversation

Only a minority of GM teams are usually involved with talent management processes beyond assignee salary reviews, but data from our Managing Mobility Survey suggests that deeper GM involvement in this area at all stages can reduce the risk of adaptation issues causing assignments to fail.

Before the assignment

When GM teams are involved in talent management from the very start by identifying potential assignees, adaptation issues for the employee or their family drops to only the fifth most common reason for moves ending early, compared to the second most common reason overall. As well as vital specialist technical knowledge, GM teams bring knowledge and experience of dealing with individual challenges faced by expatriates and integrating this into recruitment decision-making processes evidently helps to ensure the right candidates are chosen.

This insight may take on further importance as adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) within GM increases. While the survey shows only a small proportion of companies have already implemented AI solutions to their GM processes, finding talent is the joint most common area in which AI is currently used. Although the sample is small, there are indications that those using AI to find talent are more likely to experience frequent family adaptation challenges compared to those that do not. It may be the case that these organisations have enlisted the help of AI in part to try to address the issue rather than AI itself being the issue, but care should be taken to ensure AI use is carefully monitored and supplemented by human insight.

After the assignment

It may seem counterintuitive to suggest that what happens after an assignment ends could influence whether it succeeds or fails, but data from our respondents suggests otherwise.

Seeing a clear path forward within the organisation after an assignment ends can help employees to stay engaged and provide additional motivation to overcome barriers encountered on assignment. Post-assignment career planning alone does not seem to have a significant impact on adaptation-related failure rates, regardless of when that planning starts. However, when the GM team has greater involvement in the process, these issues appear to be lessened.

GM teams bring a holistic view of the assignee’s journey, ensuring that post-assignment roles align with both the goals of the assignment and the skills gained abroad. Their involvement also signals a stronger organisational commitment to the employee’s long-term development, which can improve engagement and ease the transition home. In contrast, when repatriation planning is handled in isolation by other functions, it may lack the continuity, follow-through, and personalised insight that GM is well positioned to provide.

Outsourcing oversight?

While there are benefits of GM taking a more active role in processes often handled elsewhere within the organisation, it's also worth considering what happens when key aspects of the assignment experience, such as relocation support, are outsourced entirely.

Outsourcing mobility processes is widespread. Outside of compliance-related processes, this is typically driven by a combination of limited in-house resources and the desire to reduce administrative burden. These arrangements help teams scale efficiently and stay focused on core processes, especially when internal capacity is stretched. But as we examine the impact of adaptation issues, it’s worth asking whether outsourcing services that can impact how families adapt – such as housing search, school search, and even relocation – could sometimes weaken the personalisation and continuity of support, contributing to the problem.

As deeper GM involvement in other areas reduces the likelihood of moves ending early due to adaptation issues, it raises the question of whether it can be more beneficial to bring outsourced processes back in-house for those experiencing assignments ending early. In-house involvement may not scale as easily, but it offers the advantage of closer integration, more contextual insight, and the ability to intervene early. That being said, bringing relocation services entirely in-house is unlikely to be either practical or desirable for most organisations. These services require specialised expertise, local knowledge, and delivery infrastructure that external providers are well placed to offer. The issue therefore is less about replacing vendors and more about how GM teams can maintain meaningful visibility and influence over how those services are delivered, ensuring that the support provided aligns with both the assignee’s needs and the organisation’s strategic goals.

Across this 3-part blog series, we’ve shown that overcoming the barriers to international mobility requires more than a competitive pay package. From the early stages of candidate selection to the realities of family adaptation and the long-term success of the assignment, global mobility teams play a critical role at every step.

Success depends on supporting the whole assignee experience – through tailored preparation, family-focused support, and by ensuring GM has meaningful influence over both internal processes and outsourced services. The organisations that empower their GM teams to take this strategic role will be the ones best placed to reduce risk, protect investment and keep global operations moving.

  FIND OUT MORE

  Please contact us to speak to a member of our team directly.