1 / 20

Project Profile Overview

Benchmarking Lithuania A gainst O ther European L ocations C ase study: recruitment agency office. Project Profile Overview. fDi Benchmark Matrix.

yepa
Download Presentation

Project Profile Overview

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Benchmarking Lithuania Against Other European LocationsCase study: recruitment agency office

  2. Project Profile Overview Recruitment agency office1 * (Country Level)

  3. fDi Benchmark Matrix The fDi Benchmark Matrix shows the trade off between cost and quality across the 5 selected locations for the Recruitment agency office1 * profile. The average cost and quality score is 100 for the selected locations. Recruitment agency office1 * (Country Level)

  4. fDi Benchmark Matrix The matrix is based on the weighting and cost model for the Recruitment agency office1 * profile. The weighting model identifies the key location criteria for the project and the cost model shows the primary cost inputs for the operation. The cost and quality scores are calculated using real data on all the location requirements and cost inputs. The results indicate the different location solutions for the investor as follows: • Lithuania offer higher quality at lower cost than the average of all the selected locations • UK offer higher quality but at higher cost • Czech Republic, Hungary offer lower cost, but at lower quality The Operating Cost value is in EUR - Euro Recruitment agency office1 * (Country Level)

  5. Location Attractiveness Index The location attractiveness index shows the overall attractiveness of the 5 selected locations for the Recruitment agency office1 * profile. The ratio of quality to cost is 50:50 Recruitment agency office1 * (Country Level)

  6. Cost Quality Competitiveness • The cost quality competitiveness uses the results of the fDi Benchmark Matrix to show the value for money of each location option. The graph shows that: • The top location offering the highest quality for a given level of cost is Lithuania • Lithuania also offers an above average level of quality and good value for money as its relative quality is higher than its relative cost Recruitment agency office1 * (Country Level)

  7. Cost Competitiveness The annual operating cost calculation for Recruitment agency office1 * is based on the following primary input costs: Labour Cost The average cost across the selected locations for Recruitment agency office1 * is EUR894683 The greatest cost saving between the selected locations is EUR852504 per annum The values in the chart below are in EUR - Euro Recruitment agency office1 * (Country Level)

  8. Cost Competitiveness • The location with the lowest operating costs is Lithuania • In terms of the individual cost factors, the location with the lowest costs is: • Labour Cost: Lithuania • Telecoms: Lithuania • The values in the table below are in EUR - Euro Recruitment agency office1 * (Country Level)

  9. Quality Competitiveness The quality competitiveness assessment is based on the weight model for the Recruitment agency office1 * profile which assesses each location across the following location factors: General Business Environment, Labour Availability and Quality, Presence of an Industrial Cluster, Infrastructure and Accessibility and Living Environment. The average score for the selected locations is 100. The location with the highest quality score is Lithuania Recruitment agency office1 * (Country Level)

  10. Quality Competitiveness • In terms of the individual quality factors, the location with the highest score is: • General Business Environment: UK • Labour Availability and Quality: UK • Presence of an Industrial Cluster: Lithuania • Infrastructure and Accessibility: UK • Living Environment: Lithuania Recruitment agency office1 * (Country Level)

  11. General Business Environment The quality competitiveness breakdown for General Business Environment for the Recruitment agency office1 * profile is shown below The location with the highest overall score for General Business Environment is UK Recruitment agency office1 * (Country Level)

  12. General Business Environment • In terms of the individual quality criteria within General Business Environment, the location with the highest score is: • Economic growth and stability: UK • Operating risk: Sweden • Taxation and incentives: UK • Access to finance: Sweden • Regulatory environment: Sweden Recruitment agency office1 * (Country Level)

  13. Labour Availability and Quality The quality competitiveness breakdown for Labour Availability and Quality for the Recruitment agency office1 * profile is shown below The location with the highest overall score for Labour Availability and Quality is UK Recruitment agency office1 * (Country Level)

  14. Labour Availability and Quality • In terms of the individual quality criteria within Labour Availability and Quality, the location with the highest score is: • Overall size of labour market: UK • Tightness and competition for labour: Lithuania • Experienced industry-specific staff: UK • Non-experienced staff: Lithuania • Skills, attitudes and productivity: Sweden • Flexibility of labour regulations: UK Recruitment agency office1 * (Country Level)

  15. Presence of an Industrial Cluster The quality competitiveness breakdown for Presence of an Industrial Cluster for the Recruitment agency office1 * profile is shown below The location with the highest overall score for Presence of an Industrial Cluster is Lithuania Recruitment agency office1 * (Country Level)

  16. Presence of an Industrial Cluster • In terms of the individual quality criteria within Presence of an Industrial Cluster, the location with the highest score is: • Size of industry: Lithuania • Track record: UK • Export competitiveness: UK • Industry Specialisation: UK Recruitment agency office1 * (Country Level)

  17. Infrastructure and Accessibility The quality competitiveness breakdown for Infrastructure and Accessibility for the Recruitment agency office1 * profile is shown below The location with the highest overall score for Infrastructure and Accessibility is UK Recruitment agency office1 * (Country Level)

  18. Infrastructure and Accessibility • In terms of the individual quality criteria within Infrastructure and Accessibility, the location with the highest score is: • Access to major overseas markets: Sweden • Quality of local infrastructure: UK • Quality of utilities: Czech Republic • Quality of ICT infrastructure: Sweden Recruitment agency office1 * (Country Level)

  19. Living Environment The quality competitiveness breakdown for Living Environment for the Recruitment agency office1 * profile is shown below The location with the highest overall score for Living Environment is Lithuania Recruitment agency office1 * (Country Level)

  20. Living Environment • In terms of the individual quality criteria within Living Environment, the location with the highest score is: • Cost of living: Lithuania • Attractiveness for international staff: UK • Safety: Sweden • Healthcare: Lithuania Recruitment agency office1 * (Country Level)

More Related