How governments are winning the Tech talent war

Right now, dozens of countries are competing for digital nomads, and this rivalry grows fiercer by the year. But when governments talk about attracting talent, it usually boils down to visas. But visas are the very end of the funnel, and the conversation needs to start much earlier.

Before someone applies for a visa, they have to want to move. They need a reason to choose your country over somewhere else. Some governments are getting much better at understanding this principle, and the most interesting examples look surprisingly similar to product-led companies.

Dubai, for instance, has been doing this for years.

Viewing Dubai as a vertically integrated business reveals why one layer doesn’t need to capture all the profit on its own if it feeds a higher-margin business downstream. Cheap flights through Dubai function in the same way, encouraging layover passengers to step out and experience the city itself.

Emirates itself can run at zero profit on the ticket, but as soon as a traveler exits the airport, especially if they stay for 24 hours, the broader Dubai economy makes its money.

The same thinking can be applied to Tech talent. Dubai has introduced long-term visas for specific groups, including people working in technology and gaming. Some of these programmes also have referral mechanics built into them allowing high-earning residents to sponsor peers or members of their teams.

There is, of course, nothing permanent about this advantage. I know people who have reconsidered Dubai after moving there. In the end, a product can lose users too. And it often does.

From Japan’s shortcut to China’s high school pipeline

Japan has taken a different approach to deciding whom it wants. Its J-Find programme allows graduates of selected top universities to move to Japan for up to two years while they look for work or prepare to launch a business. They can arrive without a job offer.

Selecting talented people is hard. MIT and other leading universities have already done it. They receive applications from exceptional students and decide who gets in. Japan now uses that work as its own filter.

Some companies go much further and start building relationships with talented people while they are still in school. Jane Street sponsors maths olympiads and runs a free summer academy for high school graduates, complete with a scholarship. In China, this has become a race.

Tencent has been bringing high school students in as interns since 2019. Huawei launched its Genius Youth programme the same year, hiring on achievement rather than diplomas. ByteDance founder Zhang Yiming helped set up a research centre that takes on 30 students aged 16 to 18 every year as full time trainees in AI, maths and computer science. Carmaker Geely now recruits straight out of high school and guarantees a job at the end of the training.

These companies already know where to find the people they need. Governments don’t have to build that knowledge from scratch. They can plug into the networks companies have already built. This can be thought of as a “G2B2C” model: the government works with companies, and companies reach the individuals.

Bureaucratic hurdles and the truth about relocation grants

Europe has tried paying people to move to places that are losing population, such as Sardinia, which still offers a relocation grant. I don’t think this is a particularly convincing way to compete for Tech talent. Yes, you can pay someone to move. But once they get there, why should they stay?

There have been plenty of attempts to build the next Silicon Valley by pumping money into a location. But Silicon Valley, or other well-established hubs like Boston, grew around universities that were already producing exceptional people and companies. The ecosystem came first.

A founder looking at a new country makes a practical calculation: “If I move my company there, what becomes easier?”

For a hardware founder, being close to a manufacturing ecosystem could change the economics of their business. For a scientist, access to the right laboratory could determine whether moving is possible at all.

A relocation cheque cannot manufacture either advantage.

The same goes for accessing talent. Switzerland still uses quotas for workers from outside the EU and EFTA. Imagine being the founder of a startup, and you have found exactly the engineer you need, only to discover that immigration rules make it difficult, or potentially impossible, to hire them.

If you do manage to hire them, you may also encounter another obstacle: rising anti-immigrant sentiment. Right-wing politicians keep linking the housing and public services crises to migration, which can create a perception among immigrants that they are no longer welcome.

Compare this to Georgia. The country makes a point of making foreigners feel welcome, and if something happens to one of them, you’ll hear about it in the news until it gets resolved. The government wants visitors to know that someone is looking out for their safety.

Despite this, Europe has a strong hand

Europe already has quality-of-life assets that other regions spend heavily trying to recreate, and these become especially valuable when people start thinking about where they want to live for the next 10 years.

Especially if they have families, talented individuals feel drawn to Europe’s stability and safety, as well as to its existing infrastructure, including schools for their children.

To capture this interest, governments should think about high-conversion funnels. Someone has already considered your country and decided to move. Losing them during the next stage is the equivalent of losing a customer who was ready to buy.

Poland has experimented with programmes that help companies move entire teams and guide people through the administrative process. But we need to go beyond that. Instead of administrative gatekeeping, we need open, digital infrastructure that enables faster visa processes. We need “G2B2C” pipelines.

We also need a framework that aligns with today’s workplace reality and that supports businesses hiring fractional executives and specialised contractors.

Work has become borderless, and our geopolitical boundaries are rapidly shifting. With many countries vying for top talent, Europe needs to think like a product owner and offer practical incentives if it is to lead in technological innovation.

Europe must look at this as a core element of its sovereign strategy. It already has strong foundational assets in its public institutions and overall perception of a stable, safe place to live. As a product, it is highly sought-after.

However, if immigration processes remain sluggish, it may end up losing to other countries or regions willing to be more agile and welcoming.

At this point, the choice is still in its hands.