Manufacturing capability shortcomings

A while ago I wrote that there seemed to be the beginnings of some thinking amongst the smaller manufacturing operations I interact with about the relative value of manufacturing in high cost Australia, and retaining control of, and having the opportunity to develop, the intellectual capital involved, rather than sending manufacturing offshore in pursuit of lower costs.

I came across this article reflecting the same view, but amongst some of the biggest manufacturers in the US, and  it also reflects the beginnings of this trend.

In Australia, we have let our trade skills erode so dramatically over the last 25 years that if we do start to see some sophisticated manufacturing return to our shores, and the obvious contender is photo-voltaic cells, now almost exclusively manufactured in China with Australian technology, we may not have the technical manufacturing skills to deliver.

If this nascent trend does harden,  it will usher in a huge gap in our operational skills capability, one that will take a generation or more to fix, and most importantly to any solution, we need a recognition by federal and state politicians that we have a problem bigger than the next election cycle. The long term investment  in education and the culture changes necessary will add another big chunk of time to the reaction, possibly a generation.

Compliance or Engagement

Much of the typical managers time is spent ensuring and managing compliance, ensuring the rules are followed, the standards and timetables are met.

This is all fine, and must happen, but where does the balance between compliance and engagement happen?

We are asking stakeholders, particularly employees, to bring their brains to work, but often ensuring they do not use them because there are rules in place that need to be followed.

It is becoming pretty clear that the old carrot and stick management methods do not work in an environment where creativity and the unorthodox is the priority,  to be effective, you need engagement,  you need the right side of peoples brains to be at work.

Constantly we are being called on to be innovative, creative, to think outside the box, to seek the differentiator, and participate in a “clever country” but our whole system of education from kindergarten to post graduate, our public administration, and our career planning is geared to conformity in order to get ahead.

There is a paradox here that the post industrial age economies need to come to grips with.

Print or electronic, not really either/or

    A Wall Street Journal op-ed by Eric Schmidt, chairman of Google  argues that the demise of printed media, particularly newspapers and magazines is as much a result of their own hubris as it is the advent of new media, and that the opportunities for journalism have flourished rather than diminished.

    Fairfax have just announced that the outcomes of a strategic review conducted by McKinsey will result in significant changes to their commercial profile over time, with greater emphasis on electronic media. About time they woke up, having lost huge slabs of classified advertising, their “Rivers of Gold” revenue streams, to specialist web sites like “Car Sales”, “Seek” and others. The tenor of the public announcements still smells of them seeing electronic publishing as a competitive force, rather than a very different but  complementary one that will not go away.

    Print has lost its immediacy over a long time, first to radio, then TV, more latterly the web, but the process has not been one that should have taken them by surprise, the challenge is to harness the fundamental two differences the web has enabled:

  1. Anyone can be a publisher now, in a variety of formats from print to photographic  and video.
  2. The whole communication process is now 2 way, hugely networked and fragmented, no longer a one way broadcast, the source of Fairfax’s success last century. 
  3. My instinct is that it is too late for incremental change to their business model, even at a rapid rate, the game has moved on too far for them to recapture the fortunes of the past. Glad I am not a shareholder, although Fairfax chairman  Roger Corbett has a track record in instituting rapid improvement that generates great returns.

     

The next billions

In Australia, we are considering  the NBN, and the impact it will have, and argue about the best way to deliver it, cost effectively.

A further debate should be the impact of connecting the billions of people in the world not yet connected, and what that may mean to us, and others currently enjoying the benefits of living in a developed economy.

What will happen when Africa has access to the net, not just the knowledge, but the social tools, the ability to connect and do business across borders, absorb the cultural and economic differences they have with the developed world? With the resources base in Africa, the potential for development based on resources is huge, as with Siberian Russia, so long as the social institutions in those regions can evolve to the benefit of the majority, rather than breaking down into deadly squabbles over the potential spoils to the few.

The growth in Asia, low cost manufacturing based on low labor and institutional costs, has led to increased prosperity, increased education, a movement from the country to the cities, changes in traditional diets, will only accelerate and move to other areas in the world with increased connection, with huge flow on impacts.

Logically this also leads to consideration of the financial markets, as the developing world generates large trade surpluses, and investments in infrastructure funded by domestic saving further increasing their competitive advantage, how will the currently developed world repay the accumulated public debt? What will happen in those “developed” countries that slash public expenditure, and increase taxes to repay the debt rather than default?

We are in for a wild ride over the next few decades, but we seem to focus excessively on meaningless trivia, perhaps it is a coping mechanism.

Innovation at web speed.

“Open source innovation” is rapidly becoming an accepted strategy, an increasing trend as the communication tools on the net make it progressively easier, and people think up new ways to use them.

Eric Von Hippel     a professor at MIT wrote “Democratising Innovation” some years ago, and put it on the web for free download,  P&G have a deliberate strategy of seeking innovation from outside the firm rather than keeping it all internal, this is not outsourcing, rather it is casting around for the best ideas wherever they come from. Now, the idea has spread to more modest companies, one of my clients is experimenting with a “Wiki” as an adjunct to their more traditional and too slow technical processes.

These types of initiatives thrive on low communication costs, low barriers and transaction costs,  it is the speed to market, the creative networks, personal kudos, and energy created that works for the initiators and participants, not necessarily the promise of royalties.