Reshoring decisions in the deglobalisation era: exploring influencing factors with the Eclectic Paradigm Open Access

In the pursuit of competitive advantage, manufacturing companies have relocated manufacturing to locations considered advantageous (Di Stefano et al., 2023; Stentoft and Rajkumar, 2020). The most common relocation strategy in recent decades has been offshoring, where companies move manufacturing to distant, low-cost locations (Barbieri et al., 2018; Boffelli et al., 2020; Nujen et al., 2018). This strategy has driven the development of global supply chains, which have been sustained by the belief that low labour costs in offshore locations lead to reduced manufacturing expenses and higher profit margins (Nujen et al., 2019; Heikkilä et al., 2018b). However, recent geopolitical shifts, trade tensions and supply chain vulnerabilities, exacerbated by events such as the COVID-19 pandemic, have accelerated a growing trend towards deglobalisation and reshoring (Cai et al., 2023; Barbieri et al., 2020; Dachs et al., 2019a; Hilletofth et al., 2021). The limitations of global supply chains have become increasingly evident, especially in adapting to rapidly changing customer demands and addressing sustainability requirements (Theyel and Hofmann, 2021; Gillani et al., 2022). Reshoring, where companies relocate manufacturing back to the home country, closer to their main markets, is increasingly seen as a way to mitigate these risks while improving supply chain resilience and responsiveness (Pedroletti and Ciabuschi, 2023; Moradlou et al., 2021). It also offers companies the ability to regain control, reduce supply chain complexity and enhance production flexibility (Di Stefano et al., 2023; Hilletofth et al., 2021). This shift away from globalisation is reshaping global manufacturing (Tsai and Urmetzer, 2023; Li et al., 2025a).

The available literature within the reshoring includes three main research streams: decision-making (Boffelli et al., 2020; Engström et al., 2018a, 2018b; Hilletofth et al., 2019), implementation (Boffelli et al., 2018; Lund and Steen, 2020) and performance outcomes (Uluskan et al., 2017; Johansson et al., 2019; Stentoft et al., 2018). The decision-making stream has by far received the most attention, with the majority of research focusing on identifying and understanding the factors that are considered in decision-making (i.e. decision factors) (Johansson and Olhager, 2018a; McIvor and Bals, 2021; Mohiuddin et al., 2019), as well as influencing factors. Influencing factors are factors that trigger (i.e. driver), impede (i.e. barrier) or facilitate (i.e. enablers) manufacturing reshoring (Bettiol et al., 2023; Engström et al., 2018a, 2018b; Li et al., 2025b; Pegoraro et al., 2022). Although it has been noted in the literature that a decision factor may constitute a driver, barrier or enabler depending on the specific context (e.g., Engström et al., 2018a; Moradlou et al., 2022; Sirilertsuwan et al., 2019), scholars often examine the decision and influencing factors separately. Thus, missing opportunities to develop a deeper understanding, which is important for this complex decision-making process. Several scholars have argued that this topic requires further investigation (e.g., Lamperti et al., 2025; Moretto et al., 2020; Pedroletti and Ciabuschi, 2023).

To build robust knowledge, it is important to adopt a theory-based approach (Li et al., 2025a; McIvor and Bals, 2021; Moradlou et al., 2021). A theoretical lens helps shape data analysis and facilitates better interpretation of findings. Unfortunately, current research on influencing factors lacks a clear theoretical lens, scholars also highlight the need to consider the reshoring decisions with the advantages companies are seeking for (Bettiol et al., 2023). To address this gap, this study uses the Eclectic Paradigm (Dunning, 1998), a theoretical framework commonly used for analysing the determinants of international manufacturing. By categorising influencing factors into efficiency-seeking, resource-seeking, market-seeking and strategic asset-seeking, this framework provides a structured approach to understanding decision-making content (Pedroletti and Ciabuschi, 2023; Moradlou et al., 2022). This study further bridges the gap by considering how decision factors may serve as drivers, barriers or enablers depending on context.

To address these gaps, this study aims to examine the factors that influence manufacturing reshoring decisions. Specifically, it explores how these factors trigger, impede or facilitate reshoring activities. The research is guided by two key questions:

To answer these questions, this study adopts a qualitative approach, drawing on 16 interviews with managers from companies that have undertaken reshoring. While the sample is based in Sweden, the findings offer valuable insights that can benefit practitioners worldwide. By applying the Eclectic Paradigm and categorising influencing factors as drivers, barriers or enablers, this research sheds light on decision-making content. Furthermore, the study provides practical implications for policymakers and businesses aiming to navigate the complexities of reshoring in a deglobalising world.

The remainder of this paper is organised as follows. Section 2 reviews the research framework and influencing factors in manufacturing reshoring, Section 3 outlines the research methodology, Section 4 presents the findings, Section 5 discusses these findings in depth and Section 6 concludes the study.

The Eclectic Paradigm is used as the theoretical lens to understand manufacturing reshoring decision-making content. The decision-making content is divided into decision and influencing factors (Figure 1). Decision factors encompass all the factors that are considered in manufacturing reshoring decision-making (Johansson and Olhager, 2018a; Benstead et al., 2017; Wiesmann et al., 2017) and, based on the chosen theoretical lens categorised as resource-seeking, efficiency-seeking, market-seeking and strategic asset-seeking. Those that can be categorised into more than two categories will be referred to as hybrid-seeking. Influencing factors are those that trigger (driver), impede (barrier) or facilitate (enabler) manufacturing reshoring. (Bettiol et al., 2023; Engström et al., 2018a, 2018b; Johansson et al., 2019; Moradlou et al., 2022; Pegoraro et al., 2022). The decision factors and influencing factors are interlinked, meaning that a certain factor may serve as both a decision factor and constitute a driver, barrier or enabler.

This study is designed to uncover factors that constitute drivers, barriers and enablers for manufacturing reshoring, using the Eclectic Paradigm (hereinafter referred to as influencing factors). Prior to engaging with industrial practitioners, an extensive literature review was conducted to identify and categorise the factors influencing reshoring decisions. This review involved a targeted search of peer-reviewed journal articles related to reshoring decision-making content, selected for their relevance, recency and contribution. Based on this review, 66 influencing factors were classified within the Eclectic Paradigm. As shown in Table 1, these include six resource-seeking factors (9% of the total), eight market-seeking factors (12% of the total), 24 efficiency-seeking factors (40% of the total), ten strategic asset-seeking factors (15% of the total) and 16 hybrid-seeking factors (24% of the total).

The resource-seeking category constitutes 9% of the identified influencing factors. This category encompasses factors that are critical for gaining access to and leveraging key resources, particularly those that are exclusive to certain locations, more readily available or of superior quality (e.g., Dunning, 1998; Ellram et al., 2013; Ancarani et al., 2015).

From the driver’s perspective, this category includes factors that trigger the company to access and use critical resources. That is, resources that are either exclusively available, more accessible or of superior quality in a particular location (e.g., Dunning, 1998; Ellram et al., 2013; Ancarani et al., 2015). One significant driver is “labour resources”, the pursuit of qualified, specialised personnel, motivating companies to reshore (e.g., Di Mauro et al., 2018; Engström et al., 2018a, 2018b; Lund and Steen, 2020). Additionally, “business partners” and “currency exchange rates” play pivotal roles. Firms may reshore to strengthen relationships with strategic partners or mitigate risks linked to currency fluctuations (Baraldi et al., 2025).

Some barriers were found in this category that hindered reshoring efforts. For instance, the limited availability of “natural resources” has been identified as a reshoring barrier (e.g., Ancarani et al., 2021; Engström et al., 2018a, 2018b). Scarcity of these resources or their high prices can impede reshoring initiatives, limiting the feasibility of resource-dependent operations.

On the other hand, the presence of suitable “facilities and equipment” can act as an enabler for reshoring (e.g., Heikkilä et al., 2018b; Mohiuddin et al., 2019). When a production location already possesses the necessary facilities and equipment, it streamlines the reshoring process, enhancing operational efficiency and reducing barriers.

The market-seeking category represents 12% of the influencing factors identified. This category includes factors that exploit market opportunities within specific geographic locations (e.g., Ancarani et al., 2015; Dunning, 1998; Moradlou et al., 2021).

From the driver’s perspective, this category includes factors that enhance access to target markets or enable better servicing of those markets. For instance, “customer service” serves as a driver when firms choose reshoring to elevate service quality and attain higher levels of customer satisfaction (e.g., Engström et al., 2018b; Srai and Ané, 2016). Notably, factor “patriotism” plays a pivotal role in the market-seeking category, which attracts specific customers who want to support businesses in their home country.

Barriers within the market-seeking category impede firms from expanding their market share or hinder their ability to access customers effectively. One such barrier is the “logistics performance”. When the chosen production location lacks reliable, dependable and flexible delivery options, customer satisfaction suffers, creating a substantial reshoring barrier (e.g., Ancarani et al., 2015; Wan et al., 2019a, 2019b; Moradlou et al., 2021). Similarly, the increased “labour cost” in developed countries diminishes the cost advantage (e.g., Lund and Steen, 2020; Ancarani et al., 2021), further eroding competitiveness.

While these barriers can be mitigated by reducing “logistics cost” at the production location, as it is proximity to the targeted customer, the lower shipping costs resulted in more cost-effective unit expenses (e.g., Sirilertsuwan et al., 2019; Młody and Stępień, 2020). Consequently, the “logistics cost” serves as a critical enabler for reshoring in the market-seeking category.

The efficiency-seeking category comprises 40% of the influencing factors identified. This category includes factors that explore cost-efficient or productivity-enhancing manufacturing (Barbieri et al., 2019; Fratocchi et al., 2016; Dunning, 1998; Moradlou et al., 2021).

Within this category, 23 reshoring drivers were identified. Factors related to manufacturing costs, such as “labour costs”, “inventory levels and costs” and “total costs”, are included due to their direct influence on manufacturing profitability (Johansson et al., 2019; Wan et al., 2019a, 2019b; Rasel et al., 2020). Additionally, productivity-enhancing factors are integral to this category. Companies opt for reshoring to gain better control over the entire production process (Młody and Stępień, 2020; Rasel et al., 2020). Some firms also consider reshoring to synchronise production with other business functions (Pearce, 2014) or enhance operational flexibility, encompassing aspects like order processing, production volume and product mix (Fratocchi et al., 2016; Heikkilä et al., 2018a, 2018b; Mohiuddin et al., 2019).

The efficiency-improvement process of reshoring activities includes several barriers. One barrier is the unstable political situation in Europe, as evidenced by events like Brexit, and the Russian invasion of Ukraine. These events have brought uncertainties to European markets (Huq et al., 2021; Moradlou et al., 2021; Izzeldin et al., 2023). The transfer of information to the new production locations is usually time-consuming and may contain disruptions in information flow when transferring product data, designs and drawing details (Huq et al., 2016, 2021).

While certain factors impede the reshoring process, others act as enablers, ensuring smooth, cost-effective and operationally efficient reshoring. For example, reduced geographical distance to customers results in shorter lead times (Sirilertsuwan et al., 2019), while reduced cultural distance eliminates communication issues throughout the reshoring process (Engström et al., 2018a, 2018b). Additionally, easier access to production-related information enables a smoother reshoring process (Martínez-Mora and Merino, 2020).

The strategic asset-seeking category comprises 15% of the influencing factors identified. This category includes factors that expedite a company’s access to, creation of, or maintenance of strategic or knowledge-related assets (Dunning, 1998; Moradlou et al., 2021).

From the driver’s perspective, influencing factors in this category enhance companies’ ability to access and create critical strategic assets. For example, “product quality” emerges as a crucial driver that has prompted numerous companies to embrace reshoring strategies (Martínez-Mora and Merino, 2020). Another significant driver is the “brand image and reputation”, wherein reshoring to the home country provides an opportunity for companies to launch brand-image campaigns, emphasising their reputation and brand story (Młody and Stępień, 2020; Moretto et al., 2020).

However, this category also presents some barriers. For instance, “knowledge transfer” emerges as a substantial obstacle during the reshoring, potentially resulting in the loss of valuable knowledge gained from previous offshoring experiences (Heikkilä et al., 2018b; Fredriksson and Jonsson, 2019; Nujen et al., 2019; Waehrens et al., 2015). Additionally, competitive pressure from other companies in the same industry is a big barrier. The competitor’s reshoring action may influence companies in making reshoring decisions within tight timelines and without comprehensive consideration (Moradlou et al., 2021; Tate, 2014).

On the brighter side, some key enablers play pivotal roles in facilitating successful reshoring. Managers, by focusing on knowledge and competence requirements, can efficiently identify specific “competitive priorities” and adequately prepare for operational action before initiating reshoring (Nujen et al., 2019). Additionally, the implementation of standardised procedures and the adoption of more efficient production techniques are vital for ensuring “production and process quality” (Engström et al., 2018b; Dachs et al., 2019a; Rasel et al., 2020).

The hybrid-seeking category comprises 24% of the influencing factors identified. This category includes factors that exhibit multifaceted seeking influences depending on the specific reshoring context.

From a driver’s perspective, these factors motivate practitioners to reshore manufacturing operations. For instance, R&D contributes significantly to the development of companies’ innovative capabilities. It functions as both an efficiency-seeking driver by enhancing manufacturing efficiency through proximity to the R&D department, and as a strategic asset-seeking driver by facilitating the development and acceleration of innovative products and advanced product development (Johansson and Olhager, 2018a; Młody and Stępień, 2020; Rasel et al., 2020). Similarly, “responsiveness to market” serves as an efficiency-seeking driver by enabling companies to respond swiftly to changing demand in their target markets. It also serves as a strategic asset-seeking driver by fostering the ability to compete based on speed and agility (Theyel and Hofmann, 2021).

Barriers within this category hinder reshoring initiatives from multiple-seeking viewpoints. For example, from a market-seeking viewpoint, “legislation and regulations” hinder companies from accessing market opportunities when governments publish restrictions on trading (Rasel et al., 2020). From an efficiency-seeking viewpoint, legal issues can complicate a company’s relocation from a specific country (Engström et al., 2018a, 2018b; Huq et al., 2021). From a strategic asset-seeking viewpoint, environmental regulations in the home country can require significant adaptations of production (Engström et al., 2018a, 2018b).

To ensure a smooth and successful reshoring process, various enablers facilitate reshoring from multiple perspectives. For example, “know-how and IP” serve as an important resource-seeking enabler, contributing specific know-how and IP related to production. Simultaneously, it acts as a strategic asset-seeking enabler, supporting the integration and development of advanced knowledge and technology in production processes (Fredriksson and Jonsson, 2019; Mcivor and Bals, 2021). Similarly, “knowledge and technology” serves as a resource-seeking enabler by providing specific knowledge and technology relevant to production or reshoring. It also plays an efficiency-seeking role by enabling the smooth transfer of sensitive IPs and knowledge. Additionally, it functions as a strategic asset-seeking enabler by aiding in the development of new IPs to retain skills and know-how in the market (Fratocchi and Di Stefano, 2019; Moradlou et al., 2022; Rainnie, 2021).

This paper investigates factors that influence companies in bringing manufacturing back home and how these factors exert their influence through an inductive research approach (Eriksson and Engström, 2021). The research takes an exploratory stance, which is well-suited for examining under-researched phenomena (Yin, 2013). Although reshoring has been studied over the last decade, significant gaps remain in understanding the factors that drive these decisions, especially in a global context. Factors influencing reshoring might indeed vary between countries, and while the study sampled Sweden, the findings are intended to contribute to the broader understanding of reshoring worldwide by highlighting how specific factors influence reshoring decisions. Sweden provides a unique context due to its strong manufacturing base and established industrial practices, making it an interesting case to study reshoring decision-making content. Semi-structured interviews were chosen as they allow for a more in-depth exploration of the topic, which can provide rich, enabling us to gain rich insights into the manufacturing reshoring landscape.

The selection criteria for respondents were grounded in their direct experience with manufacturing reshoring decision-making. By selecting individuals with knowledge in this area, we aimed to gather valuable insights based on real-world decision-making processes. This is important as the first-hand experience was considered likely to offer valuable insights into manufacturing reshoring decision-making.

A total of 16 respondents, each from a different manufacturing firm, were selected based on their reshoring experience. Each respondent was involved in at least one complete reshoring project within their firm. Within the sample, reshoring decisions were taken at different levels and with various scopes. To ensure diversity in organisational roles, we used theoretical sampling. The sample included seven managing directors and nine production managers, ensuring representation from top-level production decision-makers. The firms included in this study experienced varying levels of reshoring, from partial relocation of manufacturing activities to the whole production site. Although all firms completed reshoring projects, performance outcomes varied across them. All firms were headquartered in Sweden and primarily targeted the European market. Basic information about each firm has been provided in Table 2 to offer a comprehensive overview of the sample.

The data collection followed a semi-structured interview format, using open-ended questions to probe the factors influencing reshoring decisions. The interviews began with questions designed to uncover the business background of each firm, allowing for comparative analysis across themes. Both what and how questions were asked to explore the decision-making processes and factors influencing reshoring. Each interview lasted between 50 and 120 min, allowing enough time to collect sufficient data while also allowing for the flexibility to investigate questions at a deeper level. All interviews were conducted in person at the participants’ workplaces, recorded and transcribed for subsequent analysis. To complement the interview data, secondary data sources such as company websites and annual reports. This combination of primary and secondary data enabled a comprehensive understanding of the reshoring activities of the participating companies.

The interview data were analysed using a four-level coding scheme (Figure 2), inspired by Magnani and Gioia (2023). Quotes related to reshoring decision-making were first coded through first-order coding as descriptions of influencing factors. These initial quotes were then refined through second-order coding, resulting in the identification of specific influencing factors. Next, third-order coding was applied to categorise these factors into the corresponding underlying decision factors. It is worth noting that several factors function as drivers, barriers or enablers, depending on the scenario. These multiple roles highlight the complex and interdependent nature of reshoring dynamics and decision-making processes, which were considered during the coding and categorisation. Finally, using the Eclectic Paradigm as a framework, we grouped the influencing factors into aggregate dimensions: efficiency-seeking, market-seeking, strategic asset-seeking and resource-seeking. While this study presents influencing factors in distinct categories, we acknowledge that these factors are unlikely to exert equal influence on decision-making. Their impact is often context-dependent, varying according to contingency and temporal dynamics. Assessing the comparative weight of these factors lies beyond the scope of this research, which instead focuses on identifying and categorising them as important decision-making criteria. Two authors collaborated throughout the coding process, engaging in extensive discussions to ensure the accuracy and validity of the factor extraction and categorisation.

A total of 489 usable quotes were used, from which 69 influencing factors were identified. Influencing factors were categorised into resource-seeking (3%), market-seeking (10%), efficiency-seeking (41%) and strategic assets-seeking (17%) advantages. Additionally, a portion of the factors were hybrid-seeking (29%) and were categorised into multiple categories. While this categorisation does not show which influencing factor has the largest impact on a reshoring decision, it does provide insight into the type of considerations the respondents are primarily concerned with.

To further evaluate how these factors influence manufacturing reshoring decisions, an exploratory and inductive factor analysis was conducted. Among these quotes, 70% (n = 342) pertained to reshoring drivers, while the remaining 30% of quotes were distributed fairly evenly between enablers (n = 75) and barriers (n = 72). In absolute numbers, it is 65 drivers, 33 barriers and 38 enablers.

Within the resource-seeking category (Table 3), two factors (3% of the total) were identified. One is “labour resources”, and the other is the “production foundation” of the reshoring location, which encompasses physical infrastructure, resources, production processes, support and control. These two factors were deemed crucial resources in the home country.

From the driver’s perspective, this category includes factors that trigger the company to access and use critical resources. The factor “labour resources” acts as a driver when companies reshore to tap into skilled, productive and experienced personnel, or to seek reliable, motivated and responsible employees (ID1, ID2, ID3, ID7, ID10, ID14). Similarly, the “production foundation” acts as a driver when companies reshore to use the well-equipped production foundation in the home country (ID1, ID2, ID3, ID7). As one respondent (ID1) noted: “Just the part that is about [production] design and layout, the part that is connected to our niche, is connected to a Swedish layout […]” To support this argument, another practitioner (ID3) added:

These factors become barriers when reshoring companies face challenges in finding qualified employees with specific skills. One reshoring manager (ID1) stated: “Most products we can’t move because there is […] too much labour needed”. Another manager (ID4) also expressed difficulties, stating: “It did not work, because [listing difficulties] we did not find technicians”. Similarly, managers experienced challenges in moving back when the factory in the home lacked the production foundation, such as specific work instructions and support, which necessitated additional investments (ID1).

Furthermore, these factors act as important enablers that ensure a smooth and successful reshoring process. The factor “labour resource” was mentioned as an important resource-seeking enabler, companies stated the availability of labour with specific know-how and experiences enables the production to process, one of the professionals (ID4) shared: ‘“We can do like this” someone says [when discussing the reshoring project], and [it] includes everyone’s competencies and experiences, and find out, “yes, we can do like this”[…]’ Another manager (ID8) added: “The most important [prerequisite] is skilled labour”. Similarly, the production foundation is an important enabler (ID5):

In the market-seeking category (Table 4), seven factors (7% of the total) were identified. Factors encompassed in this category include market opportunities, saturation, diversification and competitive advantages. Most of these market-seeking influencing factors served as reshoring drivers, with three of them also acting as barriers and enablers. This suggests that companies also consider capturing market opportunities in specific locations.

From the driver’s perspective, respondents stated that they reshored to enhance logistics performance and customer service, driven by the substantial potential of the aftersales market in the home country. The most frequently mentioned driver is “logistics performance”, mentioned in 29 quotes. Managers reshored to shorten logistics handling time and increase logistics precision, as expressed by one respondent (ID10): “We had large problems […] long delivery times – six weeks from China […] we could not have a high delivery precision. We could not satisfy customer requests”. Additionally, managers reshored for providing in-time and on-site services to customers (ID3, ID4, ID8, ID10, ID12), and to create value-adding activities for customers (ID4, ID5, ID7, ID8, ID10). One of the professionals (ID7) also stated: “Something that makes us more attractive to our customers […] we serve them in a different way”. and “There are two parameters as I see it, it’s money and customer value”.

Some cost-related factors served as barriers in the market-seeking category. High labour costs (mentioned in 7 quotes), overhead costs (mentioned in 7 quotes) and raw material access and cost (mentioned in 1 quote) in the home country diminished companies” cost competitiveness, hindering them from gaining more market share. A manager (ID4) said: “It [reshoring] did not work because the tool was very expensive in Sweden, about 1m SEK. We used the tool maker in China, and we got it for less than 400,000 SEK’. Manager (ID7) added: “The salary situation becomes even more problematic [in the home country]”. and manager (ID2) stated: “Land is quite expensive here”.

Furthermore, some influencing factors are key prerequisites that enable companies to reshore and compete in the home market. The enabler “market opportunities” was frequently mentioned, as highlighted by one manager (ID4): “It could be the market […] if there is no market, there is no incentive to place the manufacturing here”. Another manager (ID7) also added: “If you are offshored to be close to another market, then we won’t move back, because we want to be there”. Additionally, the decrease in overhead costs after reshoring has supported companies in reaching customers (ID4, ID11), along with the availability of related service facilities for production and the market (ID5, ID8). Manager (ID5) stated: “An important prerequisite is what is the support for manufacturing […] for quality instructions, and so on”. The factor of logistics performance (i.e. speed and dependability) was also highlighted as a crucial enabler for quickly reaching customers (ID8).

In the efficiency-seeking category (Table 5), 28 factors (41% of the total) were identified. Factors encompassed in this category explore manufacturing cost-effectiveness and productivity. Among the five categories of the Eclectic Paradigm, efficiency-seeking factors were the most frequently mentioned by respondents, in addition, the largest portion of drivers falls under this category. This prevalence indicates the most frequently mentioned motivation among reshoring manufacturers is to address inefficiencies they encountered in their offshore manufacturing processes.

From the driver’s perspective, companies opted for reshoring to enhance production effectiveness, encompassing productivity and cost-efficiency. This involved reducing total manufacturing costs (mentioned in 45 quotes), enhancing control over production (mentioned in 32 quotes), reducing delivery lead times (mentioned in 33 quotes) and improving production flexibility (mentioned in 29 quotes). As one manager (ID1) expressed: “You want better control of processes, how they are made, and how the products are manufactured”. Another manager (ID3) also commented on the offshoring experience, stating: “Administration costs you, goods disappear on the ocean costs you, extra supporting runs at home cost maybe twice the regular”.

Barriers were also noted. Some managers reported challenges in reshoring their entire production due to high “overhead costs” (mentioned in 7 quotes) and “manufacturing costs” (mentioned in 6 quotes). The high “total cost” (mentioned in 7 quotes) associated with reshoring manufacturing back home hindered cost-efficient strategies. As expressed by a manager (ID15):

Production managers noted that cost calculations during the decision-making stage of reshoring were rather conservative, resulting in significantly higher actual expenses for factories engaged in reshoring (ID1, ID4, ID15). Some companies lacked spare manufacturing capacity at their home factories, resulting in slower and more costly reshoring (ID4, ID7, ID8, ID15). Strict rules related to labour hiring and termination also impeded companies from moving back (ID7, ID8, ID9, ID11). Additionally, some managers reported challenges in acquiring qualified production tools in the home country at reasonable prices (as indicated by ID4 and ID7), while others faced obstacles in maximising the utilisation of existing machines and equipment (ID11).

To ensure a smooth process, companies stressed the importance of equipping the home country and factory with spare manufacturing capacity, reducing inventory levels and managing overhead costs. Managers highlighted the importance of spare manufacturing capacity in the home factory: “Capabilities, such as knowledge, equipment, system support, capacity, and [factory] space” (ID8). Managers also added: “A thing such as the factory space […] there are lots of empty industries available [in the home country]” (ID4). “It was easiest to move […] they had a lot of competence and a factory standing by for the volume” (ID6). In contrast, if there was not enough capacity, companies needed extra investment to make reshoring possible: “At that point, we had worked so much […] we had created spaces making it possible” (ID2).

In the strategic asset-seeking category (Table 6), 12 factors (17% of the total) were identified. These factors pertain to the considerations that guide companies and investors when determining their reshoring strategy. They play a pivotal role in shaping decisions that revolve around creating, maintaining or optimising specific assets in line with the asset-seeking strategy.

From the driver’s perspective, companies opt for reshoring to maintain or enhance their strategic assets. For instance, managers stated that their reshoring efforts aim to establish competitive priorities to stand out in the market or help them withstand competitive pressures from competitors. One manager (ID6) expressed this by saying: “[We reshore] for consolidation and modernisation to remain competitive”, while another (ID7) added: “[…] there is a reason to look – are we competitive”. Another significant driver in the strategic asset-seeking category is “production and process quality”, managers mentioned that they reshore to maintain the quality of the production process (ID1, ID4) or to benefit from efficient production processes and higher manufacturing quality in the home country (ID4, ID7).

This category also includes barriers that hinder companies from relocating, such as complex ownership issues related to production components, machinery, factories and knowledge. As one manager (ID8) put it: “Patents, for example. When you decide to move back, and at the last moment, you realise you can’t because the supplier has patents on a small part”. A manager (ID1) also added:

Also, the reshoring process can be impeded by a lack of “core competencies”. These barriers can pose significant challenges to reshoring initiatives, as explained by one manager (ID4): “It did not work because we did not have the capacity […] the competency […]”.

Additionally, enablers in this category facilitate companies in aligning their reshoring strategies with their overall development goals. This includes maintaining high-quality production and processes in the home country and having the ability to undergo a “strategy shift” and exhibit “strategic flexibility”. Managers shared their experiences related to prerequisites, one manager (ID2) stated: “Through lean [strategy], we improved the business, removed inventories, which we could move to the place where we previously had inventories [in the home country]” and another (ID7) added: “We have adapted the business [strategy] and removed waste […] which has a positive impact on bringing production back home”.

In the hybrid-seeking category (Table 7), 20 factors, comprising 29% of the total factors, were categorised. This category stands out as the second most frequently mentioned, and these factors often exhibit complex dynamics when viewed from different reshoring perspectives.

When examined from a driver’s perspective, “currency exchange rates” typically fall under the resource-seeking category. This indicates that companies reshored to access stable and strong currency resources (ID1, ID2, ID6, ID7, ID16). However, some companies reshored to avoid dealing with multiple currencies in accounting, aligning more with efficiency-seeking considerations (ID5, ID6, ID8, ID15). Similarly, “know-how and IP” serves as an efficiency-seeking driver when companies reshore to maintain or safeguard sensitive IPs (ID1, ID8, D15). Meanwhile, it acts as a strategic asset-seeking driver when companies reshore to use or develop their own IPs or production know-how (ID3 to ID6, ID13, ID16). Finally, it serves as a resource-seeking driver when companies reshore to access know-how and IPs in the home country (ID4, ID16).

Companies faced barriers stemming from previous offshoring experiences. A significant hybrid-seeking barrier is “know-how and IP” (mentioned in 5 quotes). For example, some essential components contained IPs from previous suppliers (mentioned in ID1), and specific production know-how was missing (mentioned in ID8). The flexibility of the labour market in both offshored and reshored locations is also crucial, as companies faced challenges due to stringent layoff regulations in previous manufacturing locations like Poland and China, resulting in factories and investments being “locked” in one location and incurring significant exit costs (as indicated by ID7 to ID9 and ID11).

Two frequently mentioned hybrid-seeking enablers were identified, namely, “infrastructure” and “manufacturing automation level”. From a market-seeking perspective, infrastructure plays a pivotal role in facilitating companies’ access to their target markets (as exemplified by ID8). Reliable and stable electrical and production-related infrastructure, serving as a resource-seeking enabler, is essential for uninterrupted production operations (as noted by ID5, ID8, ID11). From an efficiency-seeking perspective, using existing manufacturing infrastructure, such as buildings and factories, contributes to cost-efficient production (as highlighted in ID8, ID9, ID11). Another crucial enabler is the “manufacturing automation level”. Given the challenges of hiring qualified and long-term employees at a relatively lower labour cost, maintaining a high level of automation is crucial in the home country’s manufacturing context (as indicated by ID2, ID4, ID6, ID8, ID9, ID11). This is necessary to achieve cost-saving objectives (efficiency-seeking) and enhance production flexibility (strategic asset-seeking).

The same factor can exert different influences on various relocation decisions. Figure 3 presents a framework that serves as a foundational set of decision-making criteria. The identified 69 influencing factors were categorised through the Eclectic Paradigm to answer the what question. Furthermore, it provides insights into the factors that trigger, impede and facilitate manufacturing reshoring to answer the how question.

Our empirical findings were compared against 66 factors identified in secondary literature. Out of these, 59 factors overlapped with our data, while seven factors previously mentioned in the literature—such as “energy cost” that was previously highlighted in literature with the US and Spanish contexts (Martínez-Mora and Merino, 2020; Pearce, 2014), “information transfer” and “knowledge transfer” mentioned as drivers for US and Danish reshoring cases, barriers in the UK manufacturing context (Fredriksson and Jonsson, 2019; Huq et al., 2021, 2016; Stentoft et al., 2016)—did not emerge in this study. Similarly, factors like “natural disasters”, “supply chain resilience” and “tax advantages”, which are considered significant in US and UK reshoring cases (Tate, 2014; Ellram et al., 2013; Srai and Ané, 2016), were not prevalent in our findings.

However, our study also uncovered ten new influencing factors previously unreported in reshoring literature. The sample companies demonstrated unique drivers, such as aligning production with customisation strategies, optimising process quality and enhancing IT security and integration. Additionally, “social and ethical concerns”, “strategic flexibility” and “trade and payment terms” emerged as key factors driving reshoring (Grappi et al., 2018; McIvor and Bals, 2021). This study classified each factor as either a driver, barrier or enabler within reshoring cases, but these categorisations could resonate in other countries as well, emphasising the variability of reshoring influences across different geographies. While we noticed that influencing factors do not exert equal significant weight in influencing reshoring decisions, some factors are getting more attention in recent years, such as sustainability and customer proximity. Also, their significance varies according to contingent contextual variables such as firm characteristics, industry, geography and time period. While a detailed examination of how the significance of factors varies across contexts and over time was beyond our research scope, the knowledge is crucial for advancing both theoretical and practical understanding.

This study also revealed that some decision factors exert multiple influences, bridging the gaps of how factors interrelate and influence reshoring activities. Several factors were found to function both as drivers and barriers depending on their presence or absence. For instance, previous studies identified labour market flexibility as a driver for reshoring (Johansson and Olhager, 2018a; Lampón and González-Benito, 2020), while in this study, strict labour regulations in offshore locations acted as barriers, with companies facing high layoff costs when attempting to reverse investments (ID7, ID9, ID11). Supply networks in Europe that offer high-quality products and cost-efficiency (Sabri et al., 2022; Tsimiklis and Makatsoris, 2019) were also found to support reshoring strategies, confirming previous findings (ID4, ID8, ID9). Moreover, our study added new perspectives, showing that proximity to home-country supply networks facilitates companies to enhance the supply chain resilience to overcome unpredictable disruptions (ID5, ID6, ID7, ID8).

Favourable home-country incentives have been previously shown to attract companies to reshore, while some managers reported difficulties in obtaining governmental incentives related to manufacturing or reshoring (ID2, ID3, ID7, ID8, ID15). Furthermore, seven companies mentioned they reshored manufacturing to increase the controllability of the supply chain and production —an insight not widely mentioned in prior literature. This study also discovered some new enablers, such as the role of municipalities in creating the right conditions for companies to reshore manufacturing.

The Eclectic Paradigm was used in categorisation to develop a deeper understanding of the influencing factors. Earlier studies categorised reshoring factors broadly (e.g., host-country, home-country, supply chain and company-specific factors) but often blurred the distinctions between categories, leading to overlaps. For example, quality issues, risk management and branding were sometimes categorised alongside country-based factors, leading to confusion (Engström et al., 2018a). Another study used a matrix based on the combination of internal- versus external-environment and customer-perceived value- versus cost-efficiency (Fratocchi et al., 2016, p. 110). However, this approach had its limitations as it mainly focused on “cost efficiency” and “customer perceived value”, overlooking the intricate interactions of various factors. The Eclectic Paradigm, on the other hand, proved to be a valuable framework for analysing the influencing factors behind manufacturing reshoring.

An example of reclassification emerged with “currency exchange rates”, often seen as a resource-seeking factor (Ellram et al., 2013). While in this study, also aligned with efficiency-seeking motives, as companies reshored to stable currency zones, reducing multi-currency accounting complexities (ID1, ID2, ID5, ID6, ID7, ID8). Similarly, “business partners” and “facilities and equipment” were viewed as resources in previous research (Sirilertsuwan et al., 2019; Moradlou et al., 2021), but in this study, companies used these as efficiency-seeking advantages to optimise costs and avoid unnecessary investments (ID4, ID8, ID9, ID11). In the discussion of the reshoring-seeking factor “production foundation”, Waehrens et al. (2015) stated that offshoring fundamentally challenges the strategic foundations of factories in the home country, which matched the findings. Managers (ID1, ID2, ID3, ID7) pointed out that they reshore to use the advanced and well-established production foundation in the home country.

The factor “product quality” also shifted in categorisation. Previously, it was seen as a strategic asset-seeking driver that contributed to a company’s better image (as seen in Engström et al., 2018a, 2018b; Martínez-Mora and Merino, 2020; Młody and Stępień, 2020). In this study, firms now consider it an efficiency-seeking driver, with managers highlighting how reshoring provides better control over quality and minimises delays in addressing issues (ID1, ID4, ID7). One manager (ID7) captured this shift by stating that they now have “control of your quality in a different way”. Similarly, customer proximity, often classified as an efficiency-seeking factor, emerged as a market-seeking driver in our study, as managers believed that reshoring enabled production closer to a more mature market (ID2, ID3) and allowed for a quick response to customer requirements (ID4, ID6).

Reshoring, like offshoring, is not universally optimal, it is contingent based on company’s strategies and the regulatory environment in intended production location. Consequently, regulation may function as either a driver or a barrier depending on the circumstances. The “legislation and regulations’ in some literature is regarded as affecting reshoring companies” access to the target market and has been categorised as market-seeking (Rasel et al., 2020; Huq et al., 2021). Still, in this study, managers did not highlight market-related regulations. Similarly, the efficiency-seeking factor “customer proximity” was also categorised as a market-seeking driver, as managers believed that reshoring enabled production closer to a more mature market (ID2, ID3) and allowed for a quick response to customer requirements (ID4, ID6). Additionally, “legislation and regulations” often discussed in the context of market access (Rasel et al., 2020; Huq et al., 2021), was not emphasised by firms as a major reshoring driver, suggesting that regulatory influences vary significantly by country.

This paper contributes to the field of manufacturing reshoring decision-making in three ways. Firstly, it is one of the few studies that use the Eclectic Paradigm, a well-established theoretical framework, to systematically analyse the influencing factors behind reshoring decisions. Secondly, it develops a model that connects these influencing factors to the underlying decision factors, thereby deepening the understanding of the subject matter. Thirdly, it offers insights into the manufacturing reshoring context, which, while unique, provides valuable comparative perspectives that can enrich our understanding of reshoring across different global contexts. By addressing what and how of factors influencing reshoring activities through the Eclectic Paradigm, this study not only advances theoretical discussions but also contributes a comprehensive set of decision-making content. While prior literature has separately examined drivers, barriers and enablers (e.g., Engström et al., 2018a, 2018b; Johansson and Olhager, 2018a, 2018b; Mohiuddin et al., 2019; Lund and Steen, 2020), this paper integrates these perspectives.

The presentation of a framework containing 69 influencing factors serves as a concrete reference point for future research. Scholars can use this classification to refine theoretical constructions, investigate the weight of each factor in relocation decision-making, build comparative studies across geographies and explore temporal dynamics. While reshoring is the main trend observed, offshoring remains a possible location choice under certain circumstances. Moreover, the integration of influencing factors into the Eclectic Paradigm supports future conceptual development.

The findings hold significant implications for manufacturers engaged in reshoring activities, providing them with valuable insights to inform their decision-making. 16 reshoring cases provide a rich understanding of 65 drivers, 33 barriers and 38 enablers. Among the barriers, issues related to labour resources, labour costs and production facilities and equipment stand out. Companies can use the information to do the readiness assessments and scenario planning. This can mitigate the risk before initiating the relocation process. Managers can assess current manufacturing capacity and the state of automation to evaluate facility readiness, thereby mitigating delays and cost overruns. A given factor may function as a driver in one case and as a barrier or an enabler in another, depending on the reshoring scenario. As such, the relocation decisions should be revisited as conditions evolve. This knowledge offers practical reference for other companies undertaking reshoring initiatives, aiding in better preparation and risk mitigation.

This study also offers valuable recommendations for policymakers and practitioners. These include the creation of a favourable production environment through incentives such as tax reductions and subsidies and the development of a skilled workforce and robust infrastructure—both of which are crucial for facilitating reshoring efforts. Governments can use our findings to prioritise policy interventions by identifying which types of firms (e.g., efficiency-seeking, resource-seeking, market-seeking and strategic asset-seeking) benefit most from particular incentives. For practitioners, rapidly shifting policies and geopolitical conditions (e.g., changes in tariffs, regulations or incentives) highlight periodic reassessment of location choices based on current business goals and strategies. Our categorisation of influencing factors into five types of seeking advantages provides a valuable guide for firms to identify their strategy, thus aligning their strategy by prioritising these factors in reshoring decision-making.

While this research offers valuable insights into manufacturing reshoring decision-making, it is important to acknowledge its limitations. The study draws its data exclusively from Swedish companies, which, although offering a unique and rich perspective, may not fully reflect reshoring dynamics in other global contexts. The choice was intentional, as Sweden presents a highly developed industrial landscape with robust infrastructures, highly educated and skilled labour, additionally, approachable companies that have conducted reshoring, making it an ideal context for in-depth exploration of reshoring decisions.

Additionally, the Eclectic Paradigm, while providing a strong theoretical foundation, did not fully cover contingency factors, such as product characteristics, firm-specific attributes and personal experiences, which significantly influence companies in decision-making. To enhance the comprehensiveness of reshoring decision-making content, future scholars are encouraged to explore alternative theoretical frameworks or undertake multi-theory research across various global contexts. (Boffelli et al., 2021; McIvor and Bals, 2021). Moreover, while this study provides a comprehensive list of influencing factors, it does not assess their relative significance or how their importance may vary across different scenarios. This study opens several avenues for future research. Our findings show that some factors are gaining increasing attention in recent years compared to previous literature. Further research could investigate which factors are most significant under which conditions (i.e. four types of seeking strategy), and how these influences evolve over time. We also note the contingent and temporal nature of these influences; subsequent work should investigate what has changed, and how such changes shape the direction of relocation over time across different geographical contexts. Scholars can expand the framework to investigate how reshoring in other countries or regions would help develop a more global understanding of reshoring dynamics. By comparing reshoring decisions across different national contexts, researchers can identify commonalities and differences that may inform global best practices. Further research could also explore the long-term performance outcomes of reshoring, focusing on how identified drivers, barriers and enablers impact the success of reshoring initiatives. It would also be interesting to investigate based on different types of firms, such as reshoring of small and medium-sized enterprises versus large multinational corporations. As they may face varying challenges and opportunities, suggesting a need for further evaluation of how firm-specific factors influence reshoring decisions and outcomes, necessitating evaluations of the enablers for reshoring implementation.