The Grass is Indeed Greener in India

Authors:
Vivek Wadhwa

and China for Returnee Entrepreneurs

Sonali Jain
AnnaLee Saxenian
Gary Gereffi
America’s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs, Part VI Huiyao Wang

April 2011
 The Grass is Indeed Greener in India and China
for Returnee Entrepreneurs
America’s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs, Part VI

April 2011

Vivek Wadhwa
Visiting Scholar, School of Information, UC Berkeley;
Director of Research, Center for Entrepreneurship and Research Commercialization,
Duke University; Senior Research Associate, Harvard Law School

Sonali Jain
Postdoctoral Associate, Social Sciences Research Institute, Duke University;
Visiting Scholar, Center on Globalization, Governance & Competitiveness, Duke University

AnnaLee Saxenian
Dean, School of Information, and Professor, UC Berkeley

Gary Gereffi
Professor of Sociology and Director of the Center on Globalization,
Governance & Competitiveness, Duke University

Huiyao Wang
Visiting Fellow, Harvard Kennedy School, Harvard University;
Director-General, Center for China and Globalization

Student researchers
Pravar Vijayvargya
Ying Han
Pu Chen
Chibulu Alice Luo

©2011 by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation. All rights reserved.

 T a b l e o f C o n t e n t s

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................................................................3
OUR FINDINGS............................................................................................................................................................................4
BACKGROUND OF RESPONDENTS.........................................................................................................................4
CHARACTERISTICS OF COMPANIES STARTED IN INDIA/CHINA...........................................................................4
WHY DID THEY RETURN?.......................................................................................................................................4
PERSONAL COMPARISONS: THE UNITED STATES VS. INDIA/CHINA....................................................................5
ADVANTAGES OF DOING BUSINESS IN INDIA AND CHINA................................................................................5
THE AMERICAN ADVANTAGE.................................................................................................................................5
THE VALUE OF NETWORKS.....................................................................................................................................5
TIES TO THE UNITED STATES..................................................................................................................................6
CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................................................................................................6
METHODOLOGY.........................................................................................................................................................................8
BACKGROUND OF RESPONDENTS.........................................................................................................................8
CHARACTERISTICS OF COMPANIES STARTED........................................................................................................9
Figure 1. Age Distribution of Businesses Started.............................................................................................9
Figure 2. Distribution of Kinds of Incorporation.............................................................................................9
Figure 3. Industry Distribution of Businesses..................................................................................................9
Figure 4. Location Distribution of Businesses...............................................................................................10
Figure 5. Size Distribution of Businesses......................................................................................................10
Figure 6. Distribution of Initial Funding Sources..........................................................................................11
Figure 7. Distribution of Subsequent Funding Sources.................................................................................11
WHY DID THEY RETURN?.....................................................................................................................................12
Figure 8. Availability of Economic Opportunities
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance).........................................................................................12
Figure 9. Family Ties
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance).........................................................................................12
Figure 10. Access to Local Markets
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance).........................................................................................12
Figure 11. Contributing to Home Country’s Economic Development
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance).........................................................................................13
Figure 12. Lower Business Costs
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance).........................................................................................13
Figure 13. Government Incentives
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance).........................................................................................13
Figure 14. Expiration of U.S. Visa
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance).........................................................................................14
ADVANTAGES OF DOING BUSINESS IN INDIA AND CHINA..............................................................................14
Figure 15. Operating Costs
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance of Advantage)...................................................................14
Figure 16. Employee Wages
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance of Advantage)...................................................................14

THE GRASS IS INDEED GREENER IN INDIA AND CHINA FOR RETURNEE ENTREPRENEURS 1
T a b l e o f C o n t e n t s

Figure 17. Access to Local Markets

(Distribution of Degrees of Importance of Advantage)...................................................................15
Figure 18. Availability of Qualified Workers
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance of Advantage)...................................................................15
Figure 19. Mood in the Country
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance of Advantage)...................................................................15
Figure 20. Infrastructure (Power, Water, Broadband)
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance of Advantage)...................................................................16
Figure 21. Government Support
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance of Advantage)...................................................................16
PERSONAL COMPARISONS: THE UNITED STATES VS. INDIA/CHINA..................................................................16
Figure 22. Opportunities to Start a Business
(Distribution of Comparisons)........................................................................................................16
Figure 23. Speed of Professional Growth
(Distribution of Comparisons)........................................................................................................17
Figure 24. Quality of Life
(Distribution of Comparisons)........................................................................................................17
Figure 25. Professional Recognition
(Distribution of Comparisons)........................................................................................................17
THE AMERICAN ADVANTAGE...............................................................................................................................18
Figure 26. Salary Received
(Distribution of Comparisons)........................................................................................................18
IMPORTANCE OF NETWORKS IN HOME COUNTRY...........................................................................................18
Figure 27. Business Networks
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance of Advantage)...................................................................18
Figure 28. Personal/Family Networks
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance of Advantage)...................................................................18
Figure 29. Alumni Networks
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance of Advantage)...................................................................19
Figure 30. Ties to Government Officials
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance of Advantage)...................................................................19
TIES TO THE UNITED STATES................................................................................................................................19
Figure 31. Indian Returnees’ Contacts with Colleagues, Friends,
Family, and Organizations in the United States
(Distribution of Frequency by Contact Type).................................................................................20
Figure 32. Chinese Returnees’ Contacts with Colleagues, Friends,
Family, and Organizations in the United States
(Distribution of Frequency by Contact Type).................................................................................20
Figure 33. Indian Returnees’ Exchange of Professional Information
with People/Organizations in the United States
(Distribution of Frequency by Contact Type).................................................................................21
Figure 34. Chinese Returnees’ Exchange of Professional Information
with People/Organizations in the United States
(Distribution of Frequency by Contact Type).................................................................................21

2 THE GRASS IS INDEED GREENER IN INDIA AND CHINA FOR RETURNEE ENTREPRENEURS
 I n t r o d u c t i o n

Introduction
Anecdotal evidence indicates that large numbers
of skilled workers have returned home from the
United States to countries such as India and China.
There are no hard data available, but most authorities
agree that the numbers returning per year are in
the tens of thousands. For example, the Chinese
Ministry of Education estimates that the number of
overseas Chinese who returned to China in 2009
having received a foreign education reached 108,000:
a sharp increase of 56.2 percent over the previous
year. In 2010, this number reached an all-time high of
134,800.1 Our earlier research2 had estimated that,
as of October 2006, waiting for a yearly allocation of
120,000 permanent-resident visas were 1,055,084
employment-based principals in the focal employment
categories and their family members residing in the
United States. We had speculated that these workers
might get frustrated at the wait and return to their
home countries, producing a “reverse brain drain.”
In 2008, our surveys3 of 1,203 Indian and Chinese
immigrants who had worked in or received their
education in the United States and returned to their
home countries revealed that, although restrictive
immigration policies had caused some returnees to
depart the United States, the most significant factors in
the decision to return home were career opportunities,
family ties, and quality of life. We learned that a
majority of these returnees to India and China aspired
to start businesses within five years.
We decided to research this further by surveying
a select group of Indian and Chinese immigrant
professionals who had returned from the United States
to their home countries and started businesses there.
We wanted to learn the following:
• Why did these entrepreneurs return from the United
States to India and China?
• What are their perceptions of the entrepreneurial
climate in their home countries?
• According to them, what are the advantages and
disadvantages of working in India and China over
working in the United States?
• Do they maintain transnational ties to the United
States upon return?
We obtained responses to a detailed online survey
from 153 such professionals in India and 111 in
China. The survey was conducted from September
2010 to March 2011. In the absence of a census on
returnees in India and China, our sample was not a
random one. We selected, recruited, and researched
the backgrounds of respondents via LinkedIn, an
online network of more than 90 million experienced
professionals and managers worldwide that provides
a valuable source of information on these types of
workers. We contacted the returnees through LinkedIn
and by e-mail. We also obtained the assistance of
several industry associations in India and China to help
us connect with returnees through their own networks.
Though our findings may not generalize to all highly
educated returnee entrepreneurs, we believe they are
representative of the professionals who are returning to
India and China and starting high-tech ventures there.
We required that survey respondents meet the
following criteria:
• that the entrepreneur be of Indian/Chinese origin
and had founded or co-founded his/her current
company in India/China;

The Chinese Ministry of Education estimates that the number of overseas

Chinese who returned to China in 2009 having received a foreign education
reached 108,000: a sharp increase of 56.2 percent over the previous year.

1. Xinhua News Net, March 18, 2010; Xinhua News Net, March 3, 2011.
2. Wadhwa, Vivek; Jasso, Guillermina; Rissing, Ben; Gereffi, Gary; and Freeman, Richard B., Intellectual Property, the Immigration Backlog, and a Reverse Brain-
Drain: America’s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs, Part III. August 22, 2007. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1008366.
3. Wadhwa, Vivek; Saxenian, AnnaLee; Freeman, Richard B.; and Gereffi, Gary, America’s Loss is the World’s Gain: America’s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs, Part 4.
March 2, 2009. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1348616.

THE GRASS IS INDEED GREENER IN INDIA AND CHINA FOR RETURNEE ENTREPRENEURS 3
O u r F i n d i n g s
The most significant factors drawing both Indians and Chinese home were
economic opportunities, access to local markets, and family ties. More than
60 percent of Indian and 90 percent of Chinese respondents said the availability
of economic opportunities in their countries was a very important factor.
• that the entrepreneur had been managing his/her
company in India/China for at least a year at the
time of taking the survey, in order that he/she be
able to look back on his/her adaptation process
with some temporal certainty and to reflect on the
challenges and advantages of managing a company
in India and China; and
• that, prior to moving to India/China, the respondent
had studied in the United States full time as an
undergraduate or graduate student and/or had
worked in the United States for at least one year.
Our Findings
Background of respondents
• In our sample, the majority of respondents were
in their mid-thirties. The average age of both Indian
respondents and Chinese respondents was
thirty-seven years.
• Ninety-three percent of Indian and 89 percent of
Chinese respondents were male.
• On average, Indian respondents had studied in the
United States for 1.8 years; Chinese, for 4.2 years.
Indians had lived as professionals for an average of
five years in the United States; Chinese, 4.9 years.
• Fifty-six percent of Indian and 24 percent of Chinese
returnees moved to the United States with their
families and subsequently returned with them to
their home countries.
Characteristics of companies started in
India/China
• Most companies started by the returnees were less
than five years old.
• Few companies—26 percent of Indian respondents’
and 10 percent of Chinese respondents’—were
family-owned.
4 THE GRASS IS INDEED GREENER IN INDIA AND CHINA FOR RETURNEE ENTREPRENEURS
• Fifty-six percent of Indian companies, but only
33 percent of Chinese ones were in the information
technology (IT) sector. The rest were in a wide
assortment of industries.
• Most startups were in India’s and China’s major
cities.
• Seventy percent of the Indian companies and
64 percent of the Chinese companies in our sample
had two to fifty employees. Sixteen percent of Indian
and of Chinese companies had more than 100
employees.
• Eighty-six percent of Indian companies and
73 percent of Chinese ones had been funded
initially by personal savings. A far higher proportion
of Chinese companies (19 percent) than of Indian
ones (5 percent) had obtained initial venture capital
funding.
Why did they return?
• The most significant factors drawing both Indians
and Chinese home were economic opportunities,
access to local markets, and family ties.
• More than 60 percent of Indian and 90 percent
of Chinese respondents said the availability of
economic opportunities in their countries was a
very important factor.
• The Chinese ranked local markets as very
important reasons far more commonly than the
Indians did (Indians, 53 percent; Chinese,
78 percent).
• And, consistent with our previous research on
why Indian and Chinese immigrants return to
their home countries, more Indian (76 percent)
than Chinese (51 percent) respondents considered
family ties as very important in motivating their
return.
• The returnees took pride in contributing to their
home country’s economic development. More than
60 percent of Indians and 51 percent of Chinese
rated this as very important.

• Government incentives were far more important to
Chinese than to Indian returnees. Only 4 percent of
Indians ranked them as very important, but
23 percent of Chinese respondents did.
• Visas were a very important influence on the
decision to return by only 9 percent of the Indians
and of the Chinese in this cohort.
Personal comparisons:
the United States vs. India/China
• Surprisingly, 72 percent of Indian and 81 percent of
Chinese returnees said that the opportunities to start
their own businesses were better or much better
in their home countries. Only 14 percent of Indians
and 5 percent of Chinese said that opportunities had
been better in the United States.
• Speed of professional growth was also better back
home for the majority of Indians (54 percent) and
Chinese (68 percent).
• Fifty-six percent of Indians and 59 percent of
Chinese enjoyed a quality of life back home that
was better or at least equal to what they’d enjoyed
in the United States; 43 percent and 40 percent,
respectively, found it better in the United States.
• Sixty-four percent of Indians and 83 percent of
Chinese said professional recognition was about
the same or better in their home countries as in
the United States; 34 percent and 15 percent,
respectively, said it was better in the United States.
Advantages of doing business
in India and China
• Among Indians, the strongest common advantage
to entrepreneurs who had moved home was lower
operating costs; among Chinese, it was access to
local markets.
• In India, 77 percent ranked operating costs and
72 percent ranked employee wages as very
important advantages. In China, 64 percent and
61 percent, respectively, did.
Seventy-two percent of Indian and 81 percent of Chinese returnees said that
the opportunities to start their own businesses were better or much better in
their home countries. Only 14 percent of Indians and 5 percent of Chinese
said that opportunities had been better in the United States.
THE GRASS IS INDEED GREENER IN INDIA AND CHINA FOR RETURNEE ENTREPRENEURS
O u r F i n d i n g s
• In China, 76 percent ranked access to local
markets as very important. In India, 64 percent did.
• Availability of qualified workers was perceived as a
more significant advantage in India than in China,
with 60 percent in India and 43 percent in China
regarding it as very important.
• Indians and Chinese both (55 percent and
53 percent, respectively) saw the mood in their
countries as a very important advantage.
• Far more Chinese consider government support very
important than do Indians (7 percent of Indian and
31 percent of Chinese respondents).
• A minority of Indians (31 percent) and Chinese
(35 percent) ranked their country’s infrastructure as
very important.
The American advantage
• The only advantage respondents typically indicated
that the United States offered lay in the salaries
received—64 percent of Indian respondents said the
salaries had been better in the United States than
they were at home. Forty-three percent of Chinese
respondents stated that salaries had been better
in the United States, while 20 percent stated that
they were about the same in China and the United
States.
The value of networks
• Business networks were considered very important
by 81 percent of Indians and 91 percent of Chinese.
• Personal/family networks were regarded as very
important more frequently by Chinese (74 percent)
than by Indians (60 percent).
• Indian respondents less commonly (28 percent)
regarded ties to government officials as very
important than did the Chinese (48 percent).
• Fifty-one percent of Indians and 45 percent of
Chinese considered alumni networks to be very
important.
5
C o n c l u s i o n s
The entrepreneurs in this survey are strikingly similar to their U.S.-based
counterparts: They are overwhelmingly male, and most are bootstrapping
businesses with personal savings and funds from family and friends.
Ties to the United States
• Both Indians and Chinese maintained strong contacts
with former colleagues and family and friends in the
United States.
• Eighty-four percent of Indian returnees maintained
monthly or more frequent contact with family and
friends, and 66 percent maintained contact of that
frequency with their former colleagues.
• Eighty-one percent of Chinese returnees
maintained at least monthly contact with family
and friends, and 55 percent maintained contact of
that frequency with their former colleagues.
• Chinese returnees maintained stronger contacts with
United States ethnic and educational organizations
than Indian returnees did.
• Only 7 percent of Indian respondents, but
19 percent of Chinese ones maintained at least
monthly contact with ethnic organizations.
Twenty-five percent of the Indian and half of the
Chinese respondents maintained contact every six
months or more frequently with these groups.
• Seventeen percent of Indian and 34 percent of
Chinese respondents maintained at least monthly
contact with educational institutions.
• Thirty-seven percent of Indians made monthly
or more frequent contact with professional
organizations, as did 45 percent of the Chinese.
• The discussions that returnees engaged in monthly
or more frequently with their contacts in the United
States were about customers (Indians, 61 percent;
Chinese, 74 percent), markets (Indians, 62 percent;
Chinese, 71 percent), technical information (Indians,
58 percent; Chinese, 68 percent), job opportunities
(Indians, 35 percent; Chinese, 55 percent), and
business funding (Indians, 31 percent; Chinese,
54 percent).
• Over the previous two years, Indian returnees had
travelled to the United States or abroad for work
purposes on average 2.5 times; Chinese returnees,
4.3 times.
6 THE GRASS IS INDEED GREENER IN INDIA AND CHINA FOR RETURNEE ENTREPRENEURS
Conclusions
As recently as the 1990s, we talked about a
“brain drain.” The great majority of U.S.-educated
professionals from places such as India and China
remained in this country to work at research labs,
universities, and private companies. Most stayed in
the United States for the remainder of their careers
because the economic and professional opportunities
here were more attractive than in their home countries.
Some—particularly those in technology regions such as
Silicon Valley, Boston, and Seattle—pioneered a wave
of “new” immigrant entrepreneurship. Few returned
home permanently.
This pattern changed abruptly in the 2000s, with
U.S.-educated immigrants returning to their home
countries in growing numbers. Many were attracted
by jobs in established firms, but a significant cohort is
trying its hand at entrepreneurship. This survey offers
an invaluable glimpse into the motivations of these
professionals who are starting businesses in China and
India after studying and working in the United States.
And, though it reveals interesting differences between
Indian and Chinese returnees and the contexts of
entrepreneurship in their home countries, the most
significant themes that emerge from the survey results
are the commonalities between these two groups.
The entrepreneurs in this survey are strikingly
similar to their U.S.-based counterparts: They are
overwhelmingly male, and most are bootstrapping
businesses with personal savings and funds from family
and friends. Their businesses are small, relatively new,
and focused on fast-growing, low-barrier-to-entry
markets in IT and the service sectors. Finally, most are
incorporating their businesses as limited-liability or
professional corporations—rather than adopting the
model of the family-owned firm that was dominant
historically in both China and India.
These returnees identify economic opportunities,
the opportunity to start a business, and the speed of
professional growth as the leading motivations for
returning home. They rank these factors well above
others such as lower business costs or government
incentives, the expiration of U.S. visas, and the
 C o nc l u s i o n s

opportunity to contribute to domestic economic
development. For Indians, family ties also are a major
motivation to return, and, for Chinese, access to the
large domestic market looms large. Clearly, the rapid
growth of the Chinese and Indian economies has
created professional and entrepreneurial opportunities
that didn’t exist in prior decades.
The calculations in this report parallel those of
prior generations of U.S.-educated professionals who
returned to Taiwan and Israel in the late 1980s and
1990s. In both eras, the pull of economic growth
at home, and the professional opportunities that
growth generates, loom significantly larger than policy
measures in either the United States or abroad. It is
worth noting, in addition, that in both cases, the timing
of these “reversals” also corresponds to periods of
economic downturn in the United States that diminish
the professional opportunities for immigrants.
Moreover, the factors that led to the original brain
drain—relative poverty and underdevelopment—are
now sources of competitive advantage for India and
China. Return entrepreneurs in both countries identify
lower operating costs, lower salaries, and access to the
domestic market as the most important advantages
of doing business at home rather than in the United
States. The availability of qualified workers and the
mood in the country also are advantages to both.
And, though scholars and the media often highlight
the role of government policy in attracting or repelling
talent, the survey respondents rank infrastructure
and government support as the least-important
considerations for doing business in India or China
relative to the U.S. market.
These return entrepreneurs are uniquely positioned
to exploit the economic differences between their
home countries and the United States because of
their linguistic and cultural knowhow and connections
with domestic institutions and businesses. Both Indian
and Chinese entrepreneurs identify business networks
as being very important for entrepreneurial success
in their home countries, followed by family and
personal networks, and alumni networks. To both,
ties to government officials rank lower than their
other networks, although they are more important to
Chinese than to Indians.
This might be seen as a zero-sum story:
entrepreneurs are leaving the United States for the
“greener” pastures—better economic and professional
opportunities—at home. What was once a “brain
drain” that advantaged the U.S. economy now is
reversed, to the long-term benefit of India and China.
The data from the final section of the survey suggest,
however, a more complex process—one characterized
by a two-way “brain circulation” with potential
benefit to both the United States and these emerging
economies.
The survey confirms that, when entrepreneurs return
home, they maintain close and continuing contact with
friends and family, colleagues, customers, partners,
and sources of business information in the United
States. Indian returnees report visiting the United
States between two and three times over the previous
two years, and Chinese report visiting more than
four times in that period. A majority of the survey’s
respondents report monthly or more frequent contact
with former colleagues in the United States; more than
a quarter have contact with U.S.-based colleagues
at least roughly weekly. A majority also exchange
information about customers and collaborators,
markets and technology, or organizations with people
in the United States at least monthly; approximately
one-third exchange information about customers and
collaborators with colleagues in the United States
weekly or more frequently.
Returning entrepreneurs in India and China are
exploiting their privileged position in the world
economy: building businesses that take advantage
of their access to the lower costs, growing markets,
and business networks in their home countries
but maintaining close ties also with customers,
collaborators, and sources of information in the
United States. The accumulation of linkages between

What was once a “brain drain” that advantaged the U.S. economy now is
reversed, to the long-term benefit of India and China. The data from the
final section of the survey suggest, however, a more complex process—one
characterized by a two-way “brain circulation” with potential benefit to both
the United States and these emerging economies.

THE GRASS IS INDEED GREENER IN INDIA AND CHINA FOR RETURNEE ENTREPRENEURS 7
M e t h o d o l o g y
Regions that support entrepreneurial experimentation will remain
important nodes in today’s global economy.
entrepreneurs in regions such as Bangalore and
Beijing and entrepreneurs in the United States
offers opportunities for mutually beneficial growth.
We have seen this positive dynamic at work in the
relationships between entrepreneurs and institutions
in Taiwan and Israel and Silicon Valley: Each benefits
from participation in the decentralized, cross-regional
collaborations that support innovation in today’s
global economy. Albeit that the entrepreneurs in this
survey do not rank government policy as an important
advantage, the timing of their return underscores
the importance of the recent economic and political
reforms in India and China.
This is a lesson the United States can learn from
China and India: Regions that support entrepreneurial
experimentation will remain important nodes in today’s
global economy. Since individual entrepreneurs lack
the incentive or the ability to preserve the wider
economic environment, when competitive conditions
change they can either move to where the “grass” is
greener or work with the public sector to ensure that it
encourages future generations of entrepreneurs.
Methodology
We surveyed Indian and Chinese professionals
who had returned to India or China to start their
companies. The survey was conducted by Masters of
Engineering Management students at the Pratt School
of Engineering at Duke University from late September
2010 to March 2011. All survey respondents fulfilled
the following criteria: At the time of taking the survey,
they were entrepreneurs of Indian/Chinese origin and
had founded or co-founded their current companies
in India/China. Furthermore, when responding to the
survey, they had been managing their companies in
India/China for at least a year. Finally, prior to moving
to India/China, respondents had studied in the United
States full time for at least a year as undergraduate
or graduate students and/or had worked in the
United States.
The primary means used to recruit entrepreneurs
who met our search criteria were online “social
media.” For example, we selected, recruited, and
researched the backgrounds of respondents via
8 THE GRASS IS INDEED GREENER IN INDIA AND CHINA FOR RETURNEE ENTREPRENEURS
LinkedIn, an online network of more than 90 million
experienced professionals and managers worldwide
that provides a valuable source of information on these
types of workers. We contacted the returnees through
LinkedIn, by e-mailing them directly, and by phone.
We also obtained the assistance of several industry
associations in India and China to help us connect
with returnees.
Respondents were told that their identities would
be kept strictly anonymous. The survey was conducted
using Qualtrics, a web-based survey tool.
Of the people we were able to reach, approximately
30 percent started the survey. Two hundred and
forty-nine people started our India survey, and
153 completed it. Two hundred and one Chinese
respondents started our China survey, and 111
completed it. Most who left the survey incomplete did
so because they did not qualify.
Though our findings may not generalize to all highly
educated returnee entrepreneurs, we believe they are
representative of the professionals who returned to
India and China and started high-tech ventures there.
Background of respondents
In our sample, the majority of respondents were
in their mid-thirties. The average age of Indian and
of Chinese respondents was thirty-seven years. The
majority of Indian (93 percent) and Chinese
(89 percent) respondents were male.
We asked how many years the respondents had
studied in the United States and how many years they
had worked in the United States before returning. On
average, Indian respondents had studied in the United
States for 1.8 years and the Chinese for 4.2 years. On
average, Indians had worked in the United States as
professionals for five years; Chinese, 4.9 years.
Fifty-six percent of Indians and 24 percent of Chinese
had family members who had moved to the United
States to live with them and subsequently had returned
with them to their home countries. The spouse and/or
children of 2 percent of Indian and 21 percent of
Chinese respondents had remained in the United States
after the respondent had returned to India/China.
 C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f c o m p a n i e s s t a r t e d

Figure 1
Age Distribution of Businesses Started
Characteristics of 60
51 Kauffman Foundation
companies started 50 45
Most of the entrepreneurs in Indian
our sample had businesses that 40 35
Chinese

Percentage
had been started less than five 29
30
years before they completed our 20
20
survey. 20

10

0
1 to 2 3 to 5 5+
Number of Years

Figure 2
Distribution of Kinds of Incorporation
70
Kauffman Foundation
Very few companies 60 58
(26 percent of Indian Indian
respondents’ and 10 percent 50
Chinese
of Chinese respondents’) were 37
Percentage

40
family-owned. Most were 29
limited-liability companies or 30
23
professional corporations. 18
20 14
14 14
11
10
1 2 3
0
Limited- Professional General Sole Other Partial or Full
Liability Corporation Partnership Proprietorship Government
Corporation

Figure 3
Industry Distribution of Businesses
Fifty-six percent of 60
56
Indian respondents and Kauffman Foundation
50
33 percent of Chinese ones
Indian
operated companies in the 40
IT sector; 5 percent and Chinese
Percentage

33
11 percent, respectively, 30
companies in consulting;
19
and 4 percent and 20 16
10 percent, respectively, 11 10
10 8
companies in education. 5 4 5 6 6
3 4 2
1 0 2 2 2 1 1 1 0
0
y

ng

ci ss

or

ce

e
ai
er
og

ac

iv
nc
io

io

ur ce

ct

pa
t
lti

ng

ot
th

Re
at

at
m
na
ol

du
so o
su

m
O

uc

ic
ar

ut Pr
hn

ro
Fi
n

on
un

to
Ph
Ed

Ae
Co

O ss
ec

Au
ic
m

e
/T

m
sin
m
IT

Se
Co

Bu

THE GRASS IS INDEED GREENER IN INDIA AND CHINA FOR RETURNEE ENTREPRENEURS 9
C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f c o m p a n i e s s t a r t e d

Figure 4
Location Distribution of Businesses

Pune 6%
Not surprisingly, many of Others 8%

our respondents’ company Mumbai 9%

headquarters were located in Bangalore 31%
metropolitan areas. Thirty-one
percent of Indian respondents New Delhi 12%
had their headquarters in
Bangalore; 17 percent each in
Chennai and Gurgaon;
12 percent in New Delhi; Chennai 17% Gurgaon 17%
9 percent in Mumbai; and
6 percent in Pune. Sixty percent
India
of Chinese respondents’
Kauffman Foundation
company headquarters were
located in Beijing and
Shenzen 4%
17 percent in Shanghai. Others 16%
Hong Kong 3%

Shanghai 17%

Bejing 60%

Thirty-six percent of Indian

companies had between two and
ten employees and 34 percent China
between eleven and fifty.

Figure 5
Size Distribution of Businesses
40
Thirty-six percent of Indian 36 Kauffman Foundation
companies had between two 35 34 34
30 Indian
and ten employees and 30
Chinese
34 percent between eleven 25
Percentage

and fifty. In the Chinese case, 19

20
34 percent had between two
and ten employees and 15
9 9
30 percent between eleven and 10 8 7 7
6
fifty employees. Sixteen percent
5 1
of Indian and of Chinese
companies had more than 0
1 2 to 10 11 to 50 51 to 100 101 to 200 200+
100 employees.
Number of Employees

10 THE GRASS IS INDEED GREENER IN INDIA AND CHINA FOR RETURNEE ENTREPRENEURS
 C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f c o m p a n i e s s t a r t e d

We asked respondents to Figure 6

list the initial and (if applicable) Distribution of Initial Funding Sources
subsequent sources of capital. 100
Kauffman Foundation
A majority of Indians (86 percent) 90
86
and of Chinese (73 percent) listed 80
Indian

personal savings as instrumental Chinese 73

in having initially launched their 70

companies. Loans from friends 60

Percentage
and family members in India 50
(23 percent) and China
40
(26 percent) were the second-
most-cited factors. Two percent of 30 26
23
Indians and 5 percent of Chinese 20
13 14 14 13
had obtained venture capital 5 8 8
10 6 7
funding from firms based in the 2 4 4 3
1
United States. Three percent of 0

Indians and 14 percent of Chinese

ds

m rom the firm

U. ily

es g

U. d

be ds/

s
ify
an

ng
sin tin

e e
un

th am

th bas
S.

S.

S.
s

rs
ec

em n
lo

vi
bu is
had obtained funding from

m frie
U.
l
tf

sa
in ita

x
in s/f

sp
nk

ily e

id m
en

al
d p

rs nd

m ed

e
Ba

m om
ts fir
se ca

on
nm

as
outside the United States. Friends
be ie

fa oin

e
ou al

le

fa s fr
ba re

rs
r
er

ily
t
f

(p
pi

Pe
u

J
ov

an
and family members in the United
nt

ca

er
G

Lo
Ve

em

th
e
sf

ur

O
States also had helped 7 percent
an

nt
Lo

of Indian and 8 percent of Chinese Ve

respondents with startup funds. A majority of Indians (86 percent) and of
One percent of the respondents
in India and 6 percent of those in Chinese (73 percent) listed personal savings
China had procured government as instrumental in having initially launched
funds to jumpstart their firms.
(These percentages exceed 100 their companies. Loans from friends and family
in total for each country, because members in India (23 percent) and China (26
respondents were asked to name
all fields that applied.)
percent) were the second-most-cited factors.
Sources of subsequent funding
included the personal savings of
41 percent of both Indians and
Chinese. Venture capital funding
Figure 7
contributed to the subsequent
funding of 16 percent of Distribution of Subsequent Funding Sources
Indians and 44 percent Chinese 50
Kauffman Foundation
respondents. Nearly 8 percent of 45
Indian 41 41
40
Indians and 4 percent of Chinese Chinese
35
also reported that angel investors 31
Percentage

30
had contributed to subsequent 25
22 22
rounds of funding. Bank loans also 20 20
had been a source of subsequent 16
15 13 12
funding for 16 percent of Indians 8 9 8 9 9
10 8 7
4 6
and 9 percent of Chinese. Only 5
1 2
2 percent of Indian and 9 percent 0
of Chinese respondents had
es g

ds

rs

U. ily

U. ed

U d

be ds/

s
ify

an

ng
sin tin

e e
to
un

th m

he s

an th bas
S.

S.

m om .S.
s

rs
ec

em n
lo

vi

received government funding after

ba
bu xis

es

n /fa

m rie
tf

sa
sp

nk
v
ily e

irm

id m
en

s
in

f
e

al
r s nd
m ed

Ba

ts fir

the first round.

on
nm

as
l

t
lf
ge

be frie
fa oin

in

e
ou tal
le

fa s fr
ta

rs
i
An
er

ily
(p
pi

pi

Pe
J

m rom
ov

ca

ca
er
G

Lo
em

th
e

e
sf

ur

ur
O
an

nt

nt
Lo

Ve

Ve

THE GRASS IS INDEED GREENER IN INDIA AND CHINA FOR RETURNEE ENTREPRENEURS 11
W h y d i d t h e y r e t u r n ?

Figure 8
Availability of Economic Opportunities
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance)
80
Why did they return? 73.2
Kauffman Foundation
The most significant factors 70
Indian
drawing both Indian and 60
Chinese
Chinese respondents home had 50

Percentage
been economic opportunities,
40 36.4
access to local markets, and
family ties. More than 30 25.7 25
60 percent of Indian and 18.6
20
90 percent of Chinese 6.9 8.6
10 4.3 1.2
respondents said that the 0
availability of economic 0
Extremely Very Moderately Not Not at All
opportunities in their countries Important Important Important Important Important
had been very important. The
Chinese ranked local markets as
very important reasons far more
commonly than the Indians did Figure 9
(Indians, 53 percent; Chinese, Family Ties (Distribution of Degrees of Importance)
78 percent). And, consistent
60
with our previous research
Kauffman Foundation
on why Indian and Chinese 49.2
50
immigrants return to their home Indian
countries, more Indian 40
Chinese
Percentage

(76 percent) than Chinese 31.3

27.9
(51 percent) respondents 30 26.4
considered family ties as very 19.8 19.3
20
important in motivating their 12.8
return. 8.1
10
1.5 3.6
0
Extremely Very Moderately Not Not at All
Important Important Important Important Important

Figure 10
Access to Local Markets
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance)
60
Kauffman Foundation
48.8
50

More than 60 percent of 40

Indian

33.6 Chinese
Percentage

Indian and 90 percent of 30

29.0

Chinese respondents said 19.3 19.3

20 15.0
that the availability of 10.5 12.8
9.3
10
economic opportunities 2.3

in their countries had 0

Extremely Very Moderately Not Not at All
been very important. Important Important Important Important Important

12 THE GRASS IS INDEED GREENER IN INDIA AND CHINA FOR RETURNEE ENTREPRENEURS
 W h y d i d t h e y r e t u r n ?

Figure 11
Contributing to Home Country’s Economic Development
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance)
The returnees took pride 40
Kauffman Foundation
in contributing to their 35 33.8
31.4 30.2
home countries’ economic 30
Indian

development, with more than 26.7 Chinese

25.2
25

Percentage
60 percent of Indians and 20.9
51 percent of Chinese rating 20
this as very important. 14.0
15
8.6
10
5.7 3.5
5
0
Extremely Very Moderately Not Not at All
Important Important Important Important Important

Figure 12
Lower Business Costs (Distribution of Degrees of Importance)
Lower business costs were 40
less important, as they were 34.5 Kauffman Foundation
35 32.2
ranked as very important by just Indian
30
41 percent of Indians and 23.8
Chinese
38 percent of Chinese. 25
Percentage

20.0 20.7 20.2

20
14.2 14.2
15 12.9

10 7.1

5
0
Extremely Very Moderately Not Not at All
Important Important Important Important Important

Figure 13
Government Incentives (Distribution of Degrees of Importance)
Incentives had been far more 80
Kauffman Foundation 69.6
important to Chinese than to 70
Indian returnees. Only 4 percent Indian
60
of Indians ranked them as very Chinese
important, but 23 percent of 50
Percentage

Chinese respondents did. 40

28.7
30 25.0 23.7
21.7
18.7
20
10 2.2 3.9 5.0
1.5
0
Extremely Very Moderately Not Not at All
Important Important Important Important Important

THE GRASS IS INDEED GREENER IN INDIA AND CHINA FOR RETURNEE ENTREPRENEURS 13
A d va n t a g e s o f d o i n g b u s i n e s s i n I n d i a a n d C h i n a

Figure 14
Expiration of U.S. Visa (Distribution of Degrees of Importance)
Visas had not been very 80
Kauffman Foundation 73.4
important to this cohort overall. 70
They had been driven more by Indian 61.6
60
economic opportunities. Only Chinese

about 9 percent of the Indians 50

Percentage
and of the Chinese ranked 40
visa issues as very important in 30
motivating return. 18.6
20
10.6 11.6
10 3.4 5.7 5.8 5.7
3.6
0
Extremely Very Moderately Not Not at All
Important Important Important Important Important

Figure 15
Operating Costs
Advantages of doing (Distribution of Degrees of Importance of Advantage)
business in India 50
47.6 Kauffman Foundation
44.9
45
and China Indian
40
Chinese
We asked respondents to rate 35 31.9
in importance various potential 30
Percentage

advantages of the choice 25.0

25
between doing business in 20 16.7
16.7
India or China and doing it in 15
the United States. 10
8.3
4.3 2.3
The strongest advantage for 5 2.2
entrepreneurs who had returned 0
to India was lower operating Extremely Very Moderately Not Not at All
Important Important Important Important Important
costs; in China, it was access
to local markets. Seventy-seven
percent of Indian respondents
and 64 percent of Chinese Figure 16
ones ranked operating costs Employee Wages
as very important advantages; (Distribution of Degrees of Importance of Advantage)
72 percent and 61 percent, 50
44.9 Kauffman Foundation
respectively, ranked employee 45
Indian
40 38.5
wages as very important; and Chinese
64 percent and 76 percent, 35
respectively, ranked access to 30
Percentage

26.8 25.0
22.9
local markets as very important. 25
20.0
20
15
9.6
10
3.6 4.3 3.6
5
0
Extremely Very Moderately Not Not at All
Important Important Important Important Important

14 THE GRASS IS INDEED GREENER IN INDIA AND CHINA FOR RETURNEE ENTREPRENEURS
 A d v a n t a g e s o f d o i n g b u s i n e s s i n I n d i a a n d C h i n a

Figure 17
Access to Local Markets
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance of Advantage)
45
41.6 40.5 Kauffman Foundation
40
35.7 Indian
35
Chinese
30

Percentage
25
21.9
20 19.7
16.7
15
9.5
10 7.3
4.8 2.4
5
0
Extremely Very Moderately Not Not at All
Important Important Important Important Important

Figure 18
Availability of Qualified Workers
Regarding the supply of (Distribution of Degrees of Importance of Advantage)
engineers in India and China, 45
39.3 39.3 Kauffman Foundation
we noted in our research that, 40
Indian
despite China’s high graduation 35
35.5
rates compared with those of Chinese
30 28.2
India and the United States,4
Percentage

24.0
25
corporate executives had told
us consistently that there was 20
adequate supply in India but not 15 12.0
in China.5 This cohort reported 10 7.3 6.0
3.6 5.0
similar results: Sixty percent 5
in India ranked availability of
0
qualified workers as a very Extremely Very Moderately Not Not at All
important advantage, but only Important Important Important Important Important
43 percent in China did so.
Indians and Chinese also saw Figure 19
the mood in their countries as Mood in the Country
an important advantage. (Distribution of Degrees of Importance of Advantage)
Fifty-five percent of Indians 40
and 53 percent of Chinese, 38.0
35.7 Kauffman Foundation
respectively, said it was very 35
29.8 Indian
important. 30
Chinese
25.6
25
Percentage

19.7
4. Gereffi, Gary; Wadhwa, Vivek; Rissing, Ben; 20
and Ong, Ryan, “Getting the Numbers Right: 15.4
International Engineering Education in the United 15 13.0
States, China, and India,” Journal of Engineering 9.5 9.5
Education 2008; 97(1):13–25. Available at SSRN: 10
http://ssrn.com/abstract=1081923. 3.5
5
5. Wadhwa, Vivek; Rissing, Ben; and Gereffi,
Gary, Industry Trends in Engineering Offshoring. 0
October 24, 2006. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn. Extremely Very Moderately Not Not at All
com/abstract=1015839. Important Important Important Important Important

THE GRASS IS INDEED GREENER IN INDIA AND CHINA FOR RETURNEE ENTREPRENEURS 15
P e r s o n a l c o m p a r i s o n s : t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s v s . I n d i a / C h i n a

Figure 20
Infrastructure (Power, Water, Broadband)
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance of Advantage)
Only a minority of Indians 45
39.6 Kauffman Foundation
(31 percent) and Chinese 40
Indian
(35 percent) ranked their 35 33.7
30.1 Chinese
country’s infrastructure as a 30
very important advantage.

Percentage
25
19.7
20 18.2 17.5
13.2
15 12.0
10.9
10
4.8
5
0
Extremely Very Moderately Not Not at All
Important Important Important Important Important

Figure 21
Government Support
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance of Advantage)
Chinese said far more 45
Kauffman Foundation
commonly than Indians (Indians, 40 42.3
7 percent; Chinese, 31 percent) 35
Indian
37.0
that government support is very Chinese
30
important. 27.0
Percentage

25 22.6 24.0
20
16.7 15.5
15
8.4
10
2.2 4.5
5
0
Personal comparisons: Extremely Very Moderately Not Not at All
the United States Important Important Important Important Important

vs. India/China
We asked a series Figure 22
of questions about the Opportunities to Start a Business (Distribution of Comparisons)
respondents’ comparisons of 60
their current situations with 54.26 Kauffman Foundation
48.15
their previous situations in the 50
United States. Indian
40
Surprisingly, 72 percent 33.33 Chinese
Percentage

of Indians and 81 percent of 30

Chinese said the opportunities
17.83
to start their own businesses 20
13.95 13.58
were better in their home 9.30
10
countries. Only 5 percent of 4.65 3.70
1.23
Chinese and 14 percent of 0
Indian respondents said the Much better in Somewhat About the Somewhat Much better
opportunities were better in my home better in my same in my better in in the U.S.
country home country home country the U.S.
the United States. and the U.S.

16 THE GRASS IS INDEED GREENER IN INDIA AND CHINA FOR RETURNEE ENTREPRENEURS
 P er s o n a l c o m p a r i s o n s : t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s v s . I n d i a / C h i n a

Figure 23
Speed of Professional Growth (Distribution of Comparisons)
45
Speed of professional 39.51 Kauffman Foundation
40
growth also was better back Indian
home for the majority of Indians 35
31.78 Chinese
28.40
(54 percent) and of Chinese 30

Percentage
(68 percent). 25 22.48
20.93
20
14.81
15 13.18
9.30 8.64
10 6.17
5
0
Much better in Somewhat About the Somewhat Much better
my home better in my same in my better in in the U.S.
country home country home country the U.S.
and the U.S.

Figure 24
Quality of Life (Distribution of Comparisons)
40
Fifty-six percent of Indians Indian Kauffman Foundation
and 59 percent of Chinese 35 33.33
Chinese 31.01
enjoyed a quality of life back 30 27.16
home that was better than or 25
Percentage

at least equal to what they’d 20.16 19.38

20 17.28
enjoyed in the United States; 16.28
13.58
43 percent and 41 percent, 15 12.40
respectively, found it better in 8.64
10
the United States.
5
0
Much better in Somewhat About the Somewhat Much better
my home better in my same in my better in in the U.S.
country home country home country the U.S.
and the U.S.

Figure 25
Professional Recognition (Distribution of Comparisons)
They didn’t have to sacrifice 40
33.33 34.57 Kauffman Foundation
professional recognition, 35
either. Sixty-four percent of 30
Indian

Indians and 83 percent of 25.58 Chinese

25
Chinese said professional
Percentage

20.93
recognition was about the 20 17.83
17.05 14.81 16.28
same or better in their home 15
countries as in the United 7.41 7.41
10
States; 34 percent of Indians
and 15 percent of Chinese said 5
professional recognition was 0
better in the United States. Much better in Somewhat About the Somewhat Much better
my home better in my same in my better in in the U.S.
country home country home country the U.S.
and the U.S.

THE GRASS IS INDEED GREENER IN INDIA AND CHINA FOR RETURNEE ENTREPRENEURS 17
T h e A m e r i c a n a d v a n t a g e

The American advantage Figure 26

Salary Received (Distribution of Comparisons)
The only advantage 40
respondents indicated that the Kauffman Foundation 37.98
35
United States offered lay in the Indian
salaries received—64 percent 30
Chinese
of Indian respondents said the 25.58 24.69
25

Percentage
salaries had been better in the 19.75 18.52
20 17.28
United States than they were
13.95 14.81 13.95
at home. Forty-three percent of 15
Chinese respondents stated that 10
salaries had been better in the 6.20
5
United States, while 20 percent
0
stated that they were about the
Much better in Somewhat About the Somewhat Much better
same in China and the United my home better in my same in my better in in the U.S.
States. country home country home country the U.S.
and the U.S.

Figure 27
Importance of Business Networks (Distribution of Degrees of Importance)
networks in home 60
country 51.2 Kauffman Foundation
50
To gauge the relative 42.3 40.2 38.6 Indian
importance of networks and 40
Chinese
government contacts, we
Percentage

asked the respondents to rank 30

their importance relative to
20 16.1
each other.
Business networks were 10 4.8 2.4
1.5 1.5 1.2
considered very important by
0
81 percent of Indian and
Extremely Very Moderately Not Not at All
91 percent of Chinese Important Important Important Important Important
respondents.

Figure 28
Personal/Family Networks
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance)
40
Personal/family networks 37.8 35.7 Kauffman Foundation
35
were regarded as very 30.5 Indian
important more commonly 30 29.0
Chinese
by Chinese than by Indian 25
Percentage

respondents (Indians, 20.7

20
60 percent; Chinese, 14.6
74 percent). 15 11.4
7.3 8.4
10
4.8
5
0
Extremely Very Moderately Not Not at All
Important Important Important Important Important

18 THE GRASS IS INDEED GREENER IN INDIA AND CHINA FOR RETURNEE ENTREPRENEURS
 T i e s t o t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s

Figure 29
Alumni Networks (Distribution of Degrees of Importance)
Alumni networks also were 35
Kauffman Foundation
valued. Fifty-one percent of 30
33.0 31.7
Indians and 45 percent of 27.4 26.7
Indian
Chinese considered them to be 25 23.6
Chinese
very important.

Percentage
20 17.0

15 12.2 11.6 10.7

10 6.0
5
0
Extremely Very Moderately Not Not at All
Important Important Important Important Important

Figure 30
Ties to Government Officials
(Distribution of Degrees of Importance)
35
Indian Kauffman Foundation
Indian respondents less 30
Chinese 27.7
25.6 24.4
commonly (28 percent) 25 23.2
22.0
regarded ties to government 21.5
18.3
Percentage

officials as very important than 20

Chinese ones did (48 percent). 14.6
15 13.0
9.7
10

5
0
Extremely Very Moderately Not Not at All
Important Important Important Important Important

Ties to the United States
Close economic ties between Indian and Chinese
entrepreneurs in California’s Silicon Valley and their
respective home countries have enabled the transfer
of organizational and technical expertise between
these regions (Saxenian 2002; 2006).6, 7 Saxenian’s
study of U.S.-based Chinese and Indian immigrants,
for example, found that they have a wide range
of professional ties to their native countries. Many
returned to their native countries regularly for business
purposes and to exchange technology and labor-market
information with colleagues and friends. Some also
advised companies, invested in startups and venture
funds, and met with government officials in their native
countries.
To better understand the transnational behavior of
our respondents, we asked them to tell us how often,
in a typical year since returning to their home countries,
they maintained contact with their former colleagues,
family/friends, educational organizations, professional
organizations, and ethnic organizations in the United
States. And we asked how often they exchange
information with people/organizations in the United
States about job opportunities and business funding
opportunities, technical information, and information

6. Saxenian, AnnaLee, Local and Global Networks of Immigrant Professionals in Silicon Valley. San Francisco: Public Policy Institute of California, 2002.
7. Saxenian, AnnaLee, The New Argonauts: Regional Advantage in a Global Economy. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2002.

THE GRASS IS INDEED GREENER IN INDIA AND CHINA FOR RETURNEE ENTREPRENEURS 19
T i e s t o t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s

on markets and customers/ Figure 31

collaborators. The results are Indian Returnees’ Contacts with Colleagues,
presented below. Friends, Family, and Organizations in the United States
Over the previous two years, (Distribution of Contact Frequency by Contact Type)
Indian returnees had travelled to 90
the United States or abroad for Kauffman Foundation
80
work purposes on average 2.5 75
times; Chinese returnees, 4.3 70
times. 60

We found that both Indians Percentage 50 47

and Chinese maintained strong 40 37 36 36 34
contacts with former colleagues, 29 30 30
30
family, and friends. 20
20 18 18 19
Eighty-four percent of Indians 11 12 12 12
10 5 4 4 5 5
maintained at least monthly 1 0 2
contact with family and friends, 0
Former Family/ Educational Professional Ethnic
and 66 percent maintained colleagues friends organizations organizations organizations
contact of this frequency with
their former colleagues. Only Several times a week About once a week About once a month
seven percent maintained monthly About every six months Never
or more frequent contact with
ethnic organizations; 17 percent,
with educational institutions; and
37 percent, with professional
organizations. The vast majority,
75 percent, maintained no contact
at all with United States ethnic
organizations.
Eighty-one percent of Chinese
maintained at least monthly Figure 32
contact with family and friends, Chinese Returnees’ Contacts with Colleagues,
and 55 percent maintained Friends, Family, and Organizations in the United States
contact of this frequency with (Distribution of Contact Frequency by Contact Type)
their former colleagues. Nineteen
60
percent maintained monthly
Kauffman Foundation
or more frequent contact with 50
50
ethnic organizations; 34 percent,
with educational institutions; and 43
41
40
45 percent, with professional 35
33
organizations.
Percentage

29 30
30 27 27
Chinese connections to ethnic 24
21 20
organizations were far stronger 20 17
15
than Indian ones. Half made 11 13 13 13
10 9
contact every six months or more 10 6
5 5
frequently with these groups 2
0
0
(compared with 25 percent of
Former Family/ Educational Professional Ethnic
Indians). colleagues friends organizations organizations organizations

Several times a week About once a week About once a month

About every six months Never

20 THE GRASS IS INDEED GREENER IN INDIA AND CHINA FOR RETURNEE ENTREPRENEURS
 T i e s t o t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s

Figure 33
Indian Returnees’ Exchange of Professional Information
with People/Organizations in the United States
(Distribution of Contact Frequency by Contact Type)
40
The percentage of Indian Kauffman Foundation
35 35 34 34
respondents who discussed 32 32
32 32
at least monthly with their 30 28
contacts in the United States 26
25

Percentage
the following topics was: 22 22
20 19 19 18
markets, 62 percent; 17 16 16
customers, 61 percent; 15
technical information, 10 9 10 11
10 8 8
58 percent; job opportunities, 5
5
35 percent; and business 2
funding, 31 percent. 0
Job Business Technical Information Information
opportunities funding information on markets on customers/
opportunities collaborators

Several times a week About once a week About once a month

About every six months Never

Figure 34
Chinese Returnees’ Exchange of Professional Information
with People/Organizations in the United States
(Distribution of Contact Frequency by Contact Type)
45
The percentage of Chinese Kauffman Foundation
respondents who discussed 40 38 38
at least monthly with their 35 34 35
33
30
contacts in the United States 30
26
Percentage

the following topics was: 25 22 23 24 24

customers, 74 percent; 20
20
markets, 71 percent; technical 16 17
15
15 12 12 12
information, 68 percent; job 10
12 10 11 10
10 9
opportunities, 55 percent; and 7
business funding, 54 percent. 5
0
Job Business Technical Information Information
opportunities funding information on markets on customers/
opportunities collaborators

Several times a week About once a week About once a month

About every six months Never

THE GRASS IS INDEED GREENER IN INDIA AND CHINA FOR RETURNEE ENTREPRENEURS 21
 4801 ROCKHILL ROAD
K A N S AS CITY, MISSOURI 64110
816-932-1000
www.kauffman.org