In this election year, as the U.S. economy continues to sputter, many media outlets and politicians are embracing the protectionist cry against offshore outsourcing, or “offshoring.” Business leaders need to be alert to the many sides of the issue, but they should not base operational decisions with important long-term payoff potential on the latest hot-button headline in a political campaign.

The ascent of the global workforce into the white-collar economy has brought new opportunities for expansion and cost cutting to U.S. companies. It has also brought considerable risk. It is impossible to eliminate all risk from business relationships, of course, but it is possible to reduce your risks by understanding the differences between offshoring and work performed domestically.

The first thing a company must do to ensure a smooth transaction is manage the offshore rhetoric. To do so, you must be prepared to make a reasoned, fact-based case of your offshoring efforts if a backlash should emerge. A decision to offshore should be based on a sound business case; it should consider productivity gains, quality improvement, and cost savings. Many organizations are finding that offshoring not only makes them more competitive but also frees up resources to invest in emerging technologies and innovation, with the side benefit of creating more jobs.

Much of the negative offshoring information proffered by the media and politicians is incorrect or misstated. Organizations should avoid such passion-based influences and focus on key financial, market, and strategic inputs. In addition to arming executives with accurate information, organizations need to pay close attention to offshoring-related legislation making its way through Congress. In fact, much of the pending legislation on Capitol Hill is politically driven and intended to make offshoring less attractive by instituting tougher privacy laws and auditing procedures. If passed, many of these rules will likely erode anticipated savings from offshoring; however, they are unlikely to stop the rapid push to offshore. The bottom line is that many of the operations being offshored are better performed and delivered outside the United States.

Once the decision has been made to go offshore with some of your organization’s operations, an entirely new set of concerns emerges. These exist at the contractual level, and they have a direct impact on the success of your outsourcing efforts.

First, since offshoring is a global effort, you must build a global deal. Simply copying the boilerplate domestic-contract language and pasting it into a new offshore-outsourcing agreement will not suffice. With offshoring, managing clients through performance-based contracts is more critical than ever. You need to ensure you are going through the same due diligence with an offshore partner contract that you would with an onshore firm.

As in any new industry, flexibility is key, so your offshoring contracts should allow some flux. Your needs and your service provider’s abilities may change over the course of the agreement. The geopolitical environment may change. The host country may enact strict measures that negatively affect your company’s financial health. Be sure to include—and carefully word—exit clauses, termination agreements, and the performance-based metrics by which you will measure success.

Of course, success is a lot easier to come by when you have planned for disaster. And since offshoring is such a new phenomenon in the universe of white-collar employment, you must plan for all worst-case scenarios. Snafus will ensnare. Hiccups will disrupt. And your trip from point A to point B will likely not be a straight line. In these early stages, managing your offshoring efforts is in large part about mitigating risks.

One major risk to assess and mitigate is the legal risk offshoring presents to your organization. Your IT-outsourcing contract should contemplate how cross-boundary disputes will be resolved. Offshoring is a new delivery model that both U.S. and foreign-based service providers are leveraging. As such, even when contracting with a U.S. service provider, services could be performed overseas and your data could be moved to a country with no way for you to get it back or to prevent further dissemination. Moreover, a foreign jurisdiction likely will not enforce your U.S. judgment or restraining order.

Further complicating this problem is the fact that different countries have different positions on enforcement of contract terms, such as limitations of liability caps, the award of damages for IP infringement, or disclosure of confidential information. In order to mitigate contract-enforcement problems, it is advisable to offshore only to signatories of the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. This 1958 international agreement established a list of countries that agreed to honor arbitration decisions reached in the U.S. Businesses that outsource to these signatories will have better success at enforcing outcomes from arbitration and may avoid having to pursue litigation in the offshore country.

Another strategy to eliminate some offshoring unknowns is to work with an established service provider that has a solid delivery track record and is based in a friendly government. To date, India-based providers have been at the top of list. As such, it is critical to manage the use of subcontractors and affiliates that may be located in countries that do not adequately protect intellectual property, such as China and those in Eastern Europe.

Monitoring where your work is performed is of enormous importance to firms considering offshoring. Require the service provider to obtain prior written approval of any change in service location or movement of data to a subcontractor or other affiliate. Research shows that India, Ireland, and Canada possess strong records of intellectual-property protection, government support, and infrastructure support. The records of Israel and the Philippines are mixed, while China and Russia are not recommended for offshoring at this time. Of course, this is not to suggest that China and Russia don’t have strong delivery capability, but their current legal and business systems aren’t mature enough to manage the risks of data protection.

Time and history are on the side of offshoring. It is already here, and its growth is unavoidable. Near-term legislation and public hysteria may delay the initial speed of offshoring, but it is not likely to stop global free trade and the business exploration of transboundary capabilities. Because this latest flavor of outsourcing is still a new phenomenon, businesses must pay close attention to the issues mentioned above when drafting offshoring contracts. Focusing closely on these details now will not eliminate the media storms surrounding offshoring, but it will greatly improve your organization’s opportunities to reap the benefits that a well-prepared offshoring effort can offer.

Kevin Parikh leads the contract development team for Gartner’s Global Strategic Sourcing practice. He specializes in IT and BP outsourcing contract and service-level negotiations, strategic management, business-risk evaluation, and software licensing, both onshore and offshore.