Talent Portfolio and National Progress

The global technology industry is largely filled by migrant talent. India is the champion, with many giant technology companies led by executives from the ‘Land of the Hindustan’. Among them, Microsoft is led by Satya Nadella, Alphabet (Google) by Sundar Pichai, and IBM by Arvind Krishna. Thanks to the migrant talent India possesses, the high-tech industry has flourished in Bangalore, with 40% of the country’s software exports originating from there. Not only at the executive level, but engineers and managers also form a global network that enables India’s high-tech industry to grow. And of course, there are scientists in various research laboratories, even leading prestigious universities like MIT and Carnegie Mellon.

Great hopes for accelerating Indonesia’s economic growth rest on higher education institutions. President Prabowo Subianto has met and held dialogues with university leaders and professors four times in the last 21 months. Actively involving them in various policy formulations and human resource development ready for the future is a way to unite all potential to advance the nation. In the era of the knowledge economy, superior talent will determine a nation’s progress. Along with the demographic bonus, superior talent is Indonesia’s biggest opportunity to escape the middle-income trap.

To do this, Indonesia can learn from other Asia-Pacific countries that have successfully combined their domestic and diaspora talent. How should talent be managed to accelerate national progress? Various independent international institutions project that Indonesia will become the fourth or fifth largest economy in the world by 2050. This projection is based on the demographic bonus Indonesia has enjoyed since 2012, which is expected to end within the next ten years. Not only domestic talent, but the significant role of the diaspora in various countries is also rarely discussed. KPU data shows an aggregate of 4,694,082 Indonesian citizens registered at Indonesian representatives abroad in 2024. In the United States, there are 117,085 Indonesians spread across Washington, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, New York, and San Francisco. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs recorded 2,544,062 people, with 51.97% in Malaysia (2024). Meanwhile, Pew Research Center recorded 145,000 Indonesians living in the United States (2023). The largest diaspora populations are from India and China (each over 3 million people), followed by the Philippines, Vietnam, and Korea. The number of Indonesians currently studying abroad reaches 60,000. Australia is the main destination, followed by Malaysia and the United States. In the United States alone, out of 1.13 million foreign students, India sends 313,000 students, followed by China with 277,000, while Indonesia sends 8,348 students (Institute of International Education, 2024). This data shows a relatively low number compared to other Asian countries active abroad.

Economists Harbison and Myers (1965) stated that a country’s wealth depends on its ability to develop talent and utilise it effectively. In this context, talent represents not only human capital (knowledgeable, skilled, and experienced) but also social capital (the social and professional networks an individual possesses). This is not just local or national, but transnational in line with globalisation in the digital era. This understanding is interesting to examine when a nation’s talent working abroad for a certain period is considered a brain drain. This is the negative impact experienced by a country when its best talent migrates, especially to more developed countries. However, the positive impact experienced by India or China shows the opposite. Over time, the social capital owned by the diaspora can connect and become a lever for the growth of new industries in the technology sector—a brain gain. Although they cannot contribute physically in their home country, their social capital can connect them with global talent and business networks.

Stanford sociologist Gi-Wook Shin, in his book The Four Talent Giants (2025), explains this phenomenon using talent portfolio theory. Borrowing the logic from the financial sector of having an investment portfolio with maximum returns and minimal risk, Prof Shin applies it to managing a nation’s talent. The theory he proposes explains how a nation manages talent through a 4B strategy: brain train, brain gain, brain circulation, and brain linkage.

Brain train shows how a nation develops its human resources but keeps them connected to the home country. This includes not only formal and informal education domestically but also providing scholarships abroad with an obligation for recipients to return home. There is a weakness, namely falling behind global market trends in research and education collaboration. Japan is a country that has successfully implemented this strategy. Brain gain shows a nation’s efforts to cover human resource shortages by bringing them in from other countries. This is not only by directly importing human resources to work domestically but also indirectly through training foreign students at local universities before ‘using’ them. The negative aspect is anti-immigrant sentiment, particularly when immigrants obtain better jobs and incomes than local residents. Australia and the United States predominantly use this strategy. Brain circulation shows a nation’s efforts to encourage its talent to work abroad for a certain period and then return home with enhanced skills, experience, and networks. This strategy is more effective than brain train because talent gains direct global experience. However, the risk is that talent may not return home. China has successfully implemented this strategy, especially in the last two decades. Brain linkage shows a nation’s efforts to connect its diaspora with the domestic economy without requiring them to return home. This strategy maximises the social capital of the diaspora to open market access, investment, and technology transfer. India is the most successful country in implementing this strategy, as seen in the growth of its information technology industry. For Indonesia, the most effective strategy is to combine brain circulation and brain linkage. The Indonesian diaspora, especially in the United States, has great potential to become a bridge for the nation’s economic progress. However, this requires a systematic and structured approach, not just relying on individual initiatives. The government needs to build a diaspora database, facilitate networking, and provide incentives for those who contribute to national development. With the right strategy, Indonesia’s talent portfolio can become a major engine of growth, just as it has for India and China.