MFGx Blog : July 2008

Previous Next
0

I had lunch with Chris Norek today. Among other things, we discussed the West Coast dockworkers contract disputes that have been hanging around for months.

shutdown.jpg

Chris turned me onto a Wall Street Journal article (West Coast Port Pact Arrives Ahead of Rush that today announced a tentative agreement that may forestall another shutdown like the one back in 2002 that basically shutdown the U.S. west coast ports.

Assuming each side ratifies the deal, shippers will "have some assurance that there will be no major stumbling blocks for the Christmas season," said Chris Norek, a senior partner at Chain Connectors, Inc., a supply-chain consulting firm. "Shippers can now breathe a sigh of relief."

The agreement came after weeks of intense negotiation that took on an added sense of urgency after the old contract expired on July 1. In recent weeks, dockworkers began to flex their muscle by slowing down operations at the ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach and Oakland, resulting in what port operators said were significant productivity drops at the three ports.


As Chris correctly pointed out, this agreement comes in the nick of time for buyers.

Ironically, U.S. suppliers might have actually gained from another shutdown. Coupled with the falling dollar, rising taxes and costs to manufacture in China, and astronomic fuel and transport costs, a shutdown might have added to the overall impression that "insourcing" locally offers not only lower costs to buyers in the Americas and Europe, but may also provide them with logistical stability within a pan-pacific supply chain.

0 Comments Permalink
2

Robojackets Return From China

Posted by aj Jul 30, 2008

Perhaps you remember reading about the mighty Robojackets on MFGx a few months back.

The Robojackets, you'll recall, are the group from Georgia Tech University that aim to spread the robotics and automation word. They participate in several robotics competitions throughout the year in many different locations.

Well, they're just now back from the RoboCup 2008 competition in Suzhuo, China. They competed in events against teams from all over the world - Germany, The Netherlands, Japan, Iran, and many others.

The Robojackets team (seen below, at the MFG.com Shanghai offices) were sponsored by Caterpillar, General Motors, MFG.com, and multiple groups at Georgia Tech.

robojackets1.jpg

2 Comments Permalink
0

How NOT To Blog

Posted by aj Jul 29, 2008

I recently wrote about why manufacturers (and businesses, for the most part) don't blog.

I stumbled on and article this morning titled "12 Common Blogging Mistakes To Avoid" that gives some pretty good advice on do's and don'ts for the beginning bloggist.

Of course, that's you - if you want to be. Just register on MFGx, and you get your own blog for the manufacturing world to see.

The list of 12 mistakes deserves a read. Here are the titles of each item (with my comments in parenthesis):

  1. Thinking (more) people will actually read (a) post [they won't)
  2. Using full paragraph format (be brief)
  3. Not using or numbering lists (see previous)
  4. Trying to sell something in a blog post (the more commercial you are, the less credibility you earn)
  5. Not including facts (support your findings)
  6. Using improper titles (don't get cute - say what it's about)
  7. Writing for pHds (keep it simple, when you can ... tough for manufacturers sometimes - it's the nature of the beast)
  8. Making the post too long (again, be brief)
  9. Repackaging existing information (and be sure to give proper credit)
  10. No use of headings and subheadings
  11. Highlight or bold important terms and concepts (helps readers scan - perfect for the Web)
  12. Not using supporting images (a picture's worth a 1000 posts)

One other point from me: find your own voice. Following these nuggets of advice can get you started blogging on the right foot.

0 Comments Permalink
0

In the MFGx tradition of bringing you only the best in online, affordable collaboration tools that make sense for manufacturing SMBs, check this bad boy out:

Teamness is a free collaboration suite with a surprising number of features.

According to the Teamness site, it provides:

"... tasks, milestones, messages, file sharing, whiteboards with versions, overview of all recent activity, a powerfull search engine, groups to keep your data organized, notifications and RSS to help you stay up to date with any changes ..."

If you’re company is looking for a utility that allows for strong collaboration, this is something you may want to investigate.

0 Comments Permalink
5

Why Don't You Blog?

Posted by aj Jul 25, 2008

I found an interesting blog post this morning about the Common Excuses Companies Use For Not Having a Blog. It presents 4 of the most commonly heard excuses and some arguments in favor of companies blogging to their customer base.

The author, David Wallace, had discovered results from a survey conducted by Burson-Marsteller that found less than 15% of Fortune 500 companies communicate with customers via blogs.

The excuses David has heard from companies?

  1. We Cannot Afford To Install a Blog
  2. We Have Nothing To Say
  3. We Have No One To Write For Us
  4. We Are Afraid!

Both the survey and David conclude that there should be more. They're right.

And the survey found that the smaller the company, the less likely it is to blog. From the survey analysis:

Larger companies tend to control blogs in greater numbers than their smaller counterparts, according to the Burson study. Nearly one-third (32%) of the Fortune 50 maintain blogs, while 16% of the Fortune 201 through 250 have blogs. Only 2% of the Fortune 451 to 500 maintain blogs.

And here's what I know - in manufacturing, it's much worse. I'd venture to say that among manufacturing SMBs, you're about as likely to find a blog as oil for 19 Euros a barrel.

Blogs can be a brilliant channel for inspiration, to influence a company's strategies and products by drawing insight from its customers and prospects. But manufacturers don't see it, and I think there is one main reason why:

Manufacturers Aren't Communicators - It's not that manufacturers have nothing to say, it's that you're not often very good at saying it. It's just not how you're wired. It's the rarest of breeds that has great writing chops and strong programming, machining, or engineering skills. It's nothing to be ashamed of - it's just as unlikely that a marketing executive can program and run a Hardinge.

The answer? Practice. Writing a blog doesn't have to be long-winded - it can be brief. It doesn't have to be written to every day - just regularly. It should portray your organization as competent and allow for your prospects and customers to talk back to you.

All members of MFGx get a blog. It's free. Try it. Get your hands dirty. Have a little fun.

Who knows? This whole Internet thing just might take off.

5 Comments Permalink
0

Same As It Ever Was

Posted by aj Jul 24, 2008

Talkin' with my friend Tony last night about the credit and energy mess. Stewing on the fact that we let this stuff happen, get past it, and find ourselves takin' it in the same ways all over again - typical of conversations all over America these days. Then Tony shows me an image a friend sent him and we had a good laugh. Until we thought about it - then it got a little quiet and we just walked away. The image he showed me is of a Time magazine cover - from 1974.

I think you get the picture:

time74.jpg

0 Comments Permalink
0

Follow Up On The Oil Speculators

Posted by aj Jul 23, 2008

A few weeks back, I wrote about the open letter/e-mail sent from the 12 principals of the major U.S. airlines sharing their take that speculation and futures trading has had most to do with rising oil costs.

oilrig.jpg

The e-mail (and my post) both linked to a site called Stop Oil Speculation Now that made it easy to share this concern with your government representatives.

Just after I posted that piece I followed the link, filled out the form, and submitted it. Piece of cake.

Wellsir, today I got a response from my Senator, Saxby Chambliss. Which is to say it was from his office, and a typical form letter - well meaning, certainly, but a form letter, just the same.

I say typical because it touched on many of the hot buttons surrounding this issue - not just the issue of speculation:

The key areas of a responsible energy policy that will reduce gas prices, lessen our dependence on foreign oil, and strengthen our economy include: increasing our domestic energy production, improving energy efficiency through technology, increasing conservation, diversifying our nation's energy supply through the use of renewable fuel sources, and ensuring transparency in our futures markets.

The letter went on to explain the senator's stance on each issue and, of course, tout his and his colleague's "bipartisan" efforts to solve "... the current energy crisis."

I can't decide if this is a shell game or not. Sure, domestic production and alternative fuels are awfully important. But the one issue that government, industry and lobbyists allowed to happen - if not directly caused - is presented as an afterthought.

This, from my response to the form letter:

In the near term, I urge you and your peers to address the issue of speculation with the greatest enthusiasm and force. We have allowed regulations and laws to creep through deregulation to a point that futures trading has traded our futures in ways we've yet to realize. This behavior - while perhaps not technically criminal anymore - is at the very least abhorrent. Lobbyists and industry have been allowed to create wealth based on a scam unchecked, and government must accept responsibility and take action to correct this now. All of the valuable efforts you mention in your response will take years from which to realize benefits - closing the loopholes, focusing the FTC on speculators in the U.S., and working with other countries to scrutinize the behaviors of speculators overseas will offer short-term relief.

Our system and officials have failed us and we are looking to you to take action to fix this. I strongly urge you to focus your short-term efforts on the speculative markets and their current regulations to ensure this doesn't happen again, while we pursue the noble efforts you've listed.

Manufacturers - and all businesses - must react to this. I believe that the credit and energy crises are related in a fundamental way: They aren't random. They are the result of deregulation and opening loopholes through which the rats entered the pantry.

Whether you choose to follow the link above or not, get in the grills of your representatives.

My advice: Raise holy ****.

0 Comments Permalink
2

Autodesk - The Community

Posted by aj Jul 21, 2008

Regardless of your relationship with Autodesk, you should give their online community a bookmark.

If you're into design, grab a belt loop and hang on.

The Autodesk Manufacturing Community isn't JUST about Autodesk product (although you'll certainly get that in spades). You'll find a remarkable collection of manufacturing resources there. To whit:

  • 3D Content Sharing - Download 3D models from supplier partners and peers in the community - why reinvent the well, no?
  • Forums - Sure, they're related specifically to Autodesk product, but we're talking a collection of experts that can crowdsource many design issues - this is a great resource and worth the time to join.
  • Blogs - Again, while these are Autodesk-focused, they provide an extraordinary wellspring of manufacturing mojo and insight to any engineering or manufacturing design professional.

Communities, when done right, are tools to members and even visitors. The Autodesk community is another resource for manufacturers seeking advice, enlightenment, or solutions to design issues that cover the entire machining and manufacturing design landscape.

Heap strong manufacturing medicine.

2 Comments Permalink
0

The National Center for Defense Manufacturing and Machining (NCDMM) is a technology provider to the U.S. military and its contractor and supplier base. Its list of Alliance (technology) Partners and Board of Directors reads like a who's who of the machining universe - technology providers, academia and corporate leadership.

To get a strong flavor of the types of support the NCDMM offers the U.S. military supply chain, check out their Manufacturing Solutions page and select from the menu titled "Our Success Stories."

Now, certainly the NCDMM offers great value through driving efficiencies into the intricate manufacturing and machining processes required to build such sophisticated products. Rifling through those Solutions will give you a strong sense of what they've done and how they've done it. And they're actually much more effective at explaining what NCDMM does than the tired prose you find throughout the primary pages of the site. For example:

Over a very short period of time, NCDMM activities evolved from quick response support to participation in a full range of initiatives to resolve production issues that challenge the manufacturing and machining efforts of defense organizations and their contractor communities. This participation addresses currently deployed weapon systems as well as future systems. The impact of the Center's participation is quantifiable and significant.

Ugh.

Now, check out this one example from their repository of Solutions (in PDF format, unfortunately):

NCDMM.jpg

Now which of these best portray for you the NCDMM's competence as a potential partner?

(If you said the text, please contact me through this site with the name of your doctor. You obviously get better drugs than Elvis.)

The project sheet does several things that your Web site should do in spades:

  • Create Brief Vignettes of Your Competence - The PDF is brief. It's easy to read. It states the challenge and the solution and explains how it was done.
  • What Was The Payoff? - Show directly how your professional competence resulted in real benefits to a past customer through manufacturing excellence.
  • What Were The Time Benefits? - Time is important to your prospects. Maybe you improved the cycle time of a part or product. But maybe it was improved delivery time. Maybe it was better logistics. Whatever you did to get parts to a customer quicker and cheaper - list it.
  • Who Was Involved? - What partners did you use? What divisions or groups in your shop or plant or company? Show your versatility.
  • Put These Examples Front and Center on Your SIte - With apologies to NCDMM, don't bury your vignettes like they have. Make them the centerpiece of your site - you're talking to people that are looking for competent partners, not loquacious wordsmiths.

And another benefit of following this advice: the search engines LOVE this stuff, because you're naturally adding the keywords and phrases that your prospects are actually searching for.

Look, people don't go to the Web to read - they go to the Web to work. To be specific, the folks that you should care most about - prospects looking for manufacturers to make them look good - are.

The NCDMM - a great organization - got their Web site backwards. Push the words to the back, and what you do that makes you great to the front.

0 Comments Permalink
0

In a recent survey from Deloitte, U.S. manufacturing executives say they consider North America "the most desirable region for expansion over the next three years."

But before you go out and start pulling out the champagne, you should know - there's a catch.

First, the good news: the confluence of recent financial events is absolutely influencing U.S. businesses and where they choose to expand.

In terms of the executives' agendas for expansion, the survey found that sales and services topped the list with 76 percent planning to expand sales in the United States, 58 percent in Canada and 67 percent in Mexico. Sourcing of raw materials and parts (50 percent in China, 49 percent in the United States, and 43 percent in Mexico) and production (44 percent in the United States, 37 percent in Mexico and 37 percent in China) rounded out the top three priorities.

Overall, the vast majority of respondents said North America will not lose competitive ground in those areas over the next five years. And a significant number said they believe North America will become even more competitive by 2012 in sales and marketing (45 percent), information technology (41 percent), customer service (37 percent), R&D/engineering (36 percent) and finance/accounting (34 percent). A small percentage predicted that North America will be less competitive globally in these areas by 2012, with the balance being neutral.

And good news it is, because these are mostly high paying jobs that require intellectual competence but less direct manufacturing domain expertise.

And that brings us to the less than pleasant news, especially for those closest to the shop floor:

The only dark spot is production capability. Despite plans to expand in North America in the short term, survey respondents painted a gloomy picture of this region's ability to compete over the long run with lower-cost locations for production, especially Asia.

More than half of survey respondents (61 percent) said they expect North America to become even less competitive globally as a site for production by 2012. The key barriers to making production competitive globally were seen as labor cost (cited by 71 percent), tax policy (66 percent), work rules (66 percent), lack of availability of skilled labor (51 percent) and costs of raw materials and energy (56 percent). Not surprisingly, these were the issues most frequently cited by executives surveyed as areas that governments should address as matters of public policy.

Clearly, U.S. manufacturing management intends to continue outsourcing production to low cost countries. But while some companies may test those same regions to host their operations, most seem to be shifting toward North America for those ops - and that's not entirely a bad thing. According to Craig Griffi of Deloitte:

"The simplistic way to view manufacturing is to look only
where production is located. It's clear that a more accurate way to measure
the economic impact of these companies is to look at where all operations
are located, including sourcing, research and development, distribution,
finance, marketing, and all of the other functions necessary for a company
to thrive. In most cases, executives are telling us that North America
provides a competitive business environment for most of these activities."

0 Comments Permalink
3

12 Angry Men & High Fuel Costs

Posted by aj Jul 10, 2008

This morning, colleagues of mine and I - and maybe you, too - received an e-mail from 12 Angry Men. Most of us just juiced it without reading it.

Now let me say before I go on that I am not a big fan of the airlines, and that Delta really roasts my onions. I'm just not too fond of big, stagnant companies that can't carve a profit while killing competition at hubs, pulling the rug out from under investors, and further dehumanizing and already dehumanizing experience.

So imagine my genuine surprise when a friend forwarded this message, signed by 12 CEOs and presidents of the largest U.S.-based airlines, calling BS on what's generally being reported as the causes of astronomic fuel prices.

We've heard 'em, haven't we? Worldwide consumption is up. Emerging cultures like China are increasing demand. And we've all seen the e-mails that want us to fight the power by which gas stations we choose to buy our gas.

gage.jpg

But the directness of the e-mail - especially considering who it's from - just bowled me over. And its message is dead-nuts on:

Since high oil prices are partly a response to normal market forces, the nation needs to focus on increased energy supplies and conservation. However, there is another side to this story because normal market forces are being dangerously amplified by poorly regulated market speculation.

Whoa. Preach it, my brothers (sorry, there are no women among the 12).

This is EXACTLY the problem that the mainstream media don't comment on, because the boogey man is us. Not the Saudis, not the Axis of Evil - it's our government, asleep at the wheel again.

Or is it something worse?

Twenty years ago, 21 percent of oil contracts were purchased by speculators who trade oil on paper with no intention of ever taking delivery. Today, oil speculators purchase 66 percent of all oil futures contracts, and that reflects just the transactions that are known. Speculators buy up large amounts of oil and then sell it to each other again and again. A barrel of oil may trade 20-plus times before it is delivered and used; the price goes up with each trade and consumers pick up the final tab. Some market experts estimate that current prices reflect as much as $30 to $60 per barrel in unnecessary speculative costs.

Over seventy years ago, Congress established regulations to control excessive, largely unchecked market speculation and manipulation. However, over the past two decades, these regulatory limits have been weakened or removed. We believe that restoring and enforcing these limits, along with several other modest measures, will provide more disclosure, transparency and sound market oversight. Together, these reforms will help cool the over-heated oil market and permit the economy to prosper.

So, the actionable item of the e-mail is a link to a Web site: Stop Oil Speculation Now. Once there, you can enter your Zip Code and send a message to your members of the House and Senate, telling them to get control of this system that's clearly a mess and just as clearly their fault.

Sure, there are plenty of factors that contribute to high fuel and energy prices. And the invisible hand is surely one of them.

But this is at the heart of the matter, and is exactly the action we need to right this ship now. Not only buying gas at the neighborhood station or trading in the SUV.

These 12 men are standing up and saying what needs to be said. Greed, once again, is dragging us all down and making a very few very, very wealthy.

It’s almost enough to make me like these guys again.

3 Comments Permalink
0

I have a new hero. His name is Bruce Stokes. He wrote an article that was published last month at NationalJournal.com titled "Lean On Me."

Bruce lays it on the line specifically for presumptive candidates McCain and Obama - but the 2 main points of his message should be screamed from the highest mountaintop.

mccainobama.jpg

First:

U.S. manufacturing is far from dead. Production and exports are up. And U.S.-based factories are finding ways to compete with China through lean production, a management revolution that can transform American industry.

And second:

Thanks to a weak dollar and high transportation costs, American manufacturing will be on the rebound for the next few years. The next administration will be tempted to sit back and enjoy this gift from the economic gods. That would be a mistake.

Read this article. Pass it along. It's not good enough that it's the truth.

It's the secret to regaining and retaining manufacturing mojo.

0 Comments Permalink
0

Solar Power Update

Posted by aj Jul 7, 2008

Last month, I dropped a post on the feasibility of solar power for manufacturing facilities and plants ("Solar Power for Manufacturers - Does It Make Sense?").

The push of my post was that solar isn't acceptable for SMB manufacturers - yet. It's just too expensive. But, I proposed, maybe solar could be a catalyst to help energize manufacturing and help solve the energy and ecological conundrum we're in.

But according to a recent report from McKinsey titled "The Economics of Solar Power (registration required to view entire report), it seems that solar is gaining more steam as a viable, affordable energy source. It goes so far to suggest that solar could become comparable in cost to conventional electricity within 10 years.

Says McKinsey:

  • Within three to seven years, solar energy's unsubsidized cost to end users will approach the cost of conventional electricity in a number of markets, including parts of the United States (California and the Southwest), as well as Italy, Japan, and Spain.
  • Installed global solar capacity will grow by roughly 30 to 35 percent a year, from 10 gigawatts today to about 200 gigawatts in 2020.

While likely investment is baked into McKinsey's forecast, it's not too clear how unforeseen technological advances could affect velocity. Regardless, this is an astonishing prediction from a more than reliable, credible source.

More to follow ...

0 Comments Permalink
2

Apparently for SMB manufacturers, there is safety - and bucks - in numbers. But how scalable and long-term this strategy becomes may all depend on the motive and how it's accomplished.

To fight the battle against low-cost manufacturing countries and shifting sources for discrete parts, materials and services, manufacturers everywhere are forming alliances and groups to provide tight geographic solutions clusters for buyers.

Forget for a moment - if that's possible - about the sense this makes with fuel and shipping costs where they are, or even about which country or region is the best candidate for coopetition.

Profit can play just as strong a role as survival to motivate previous competitors to cooperate.

crossed.jpg

For a perfect example of how coalitions of manufacturers are forming to reinvent the notion of competition and services in manufacturing (without a low-cost threat involved), check out Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything (see the story of Chongqing and its formidable motorcycle designing and building network in China, beginning on page 219).

The Chongqing network is a free-forming, loosely based organism of drifting designers and engineers and machinists and assemblers that somehow work and collaborate as one of the world's most successful (re: profitable) motorcycle building businesses.

In the U.S., several regions and states have seen SMB manufacturers form coalitions to forego competitive relationships to survive.

No state has seen more setbacks than Michigan, and it has produced two examples of a more structured approach to coopetition:

  • Defense Contract Coordination Center (DC3) - This entity was created to connect military purchasing bodies with qualified Michigan-based manufacturers that match their needs.
  • United Tooling Coalition - This consortium of manufacturers have banded together to provide a one-stop, regionally tight destination for several services - dies, molds, machining, prototyping, design, fixtures, engineering, and more.

So, here's the rub. One approach is abstract, and allows for interaction and collaboration with little traditional structure. The other is linear, in that while it changes the channels through which work enters the companies it allows them to operate fundamentally the same.

Which model has the best chance to survive? One? Both? A combination?

2 Comments Permalink
0

Hope: A Global Independence Day

Posted by aj Jul 3, 2008

Tomorrow in the U.S. we'll be celebrating our country's independence from England. Every country has their national holiday to celebrate itself. July 4th is when we eat too much and blow stuff up.

Hey, we're Americans. It's what we do.

But this year is different. There are many chickens coming home to roost that aren't just affecting my country directly - our world is seeing fundamental change, and it's awfully troubling these days to play the tape through to its end.

It's pretty clear to me that most everything that ails our world these days boils down to energy - where it comes from, who uses it, and its byproducts are challenging us all economically, politically and morally.

Sure, economies get screwed around and nature always comes around to remind us that she's in charge. But to me, our most serious challenge that we can do something about is energy and how it's used.

In the most recent Time magazine (U.S. version), in an article titled "10 Things You Can Like About $4 Gas," the number 1 thing to like is "Globalized Jobs Return Home".

The world suddenly seems big again. A family of four can't fly cross-country for much less than $2,000. The cost of shipping a standard 40-ft. (12 m) container of couches from Shanghai to New Jersey has tripled since 2000. Trucking carrots from Mexico to Georgia makes less and less economic sense.

In more industries, such as steel, lawn-mower batteries and upscale furniture, doing business in the U.S. is starting to look slightly more feasible.

All true, and it's a trend you'll see gaining steam in the coming months and years. But I fear that manufacturing in general - and the U.S. specifically - will fall back into a familiar reaction to this. Whenever a threat has turned out to be less deadly than was first believed - the threat to the U.S. manufacturing base from other manufacturing sources (Japan), the threat of outsourcing (1980's) - manufacturers heaved a sigh of relief and got complacent again until the next threat came along (China). Then everyone acted surprised, like it never happened before.

Maybe that's human nature. But in the case of energy, we have an opportunity now to do something bold even if the pain of outsourcing begins to ease from work pulling back to less expensive locations, logistically speaking. We all need to come together toward an initiative to wean ourselves now from traditional, less renewable, fossil fuels and high carbon footprints. We need to adopt alternative energy sources, and we all know it. But we can't.

Cause we don't have the huevos.

This morning, I came across an op-ed piece in the latest Industry Week that represents my thoughts, and I'm pretty sure it will resonate strongly with you. In "More Than Just Earth-Friendly, Going "Green" a Route To Jobs and Prosperity, John Madigan points to a logical solution and how to get there:

Manufacturing ... actually creates both wealth and jobs. Developing "green" manufacturing technology also offers opportunities to become a net exporter of environmentally friendly products and processes. "Green" manufacturing, and the technology to support it, can create the required $20-per-hour jobs to sustain a strong middle class while helping to solve air, energy, water, and food crises.

Create a government-sponsored program, similar to the "Apollo Program," to create jobs based on solving environmental needs. Such a program, focused on self-sustaining and renewable solar, wind, water turbine, clean hydrogen energy and desalination of the ocean's water, could jump-start a revival of U.S. manufacturing.

  • Incent companies, by tax policy, which make environmentally friendly and sustainable end products here.

  • Create prizes to reward innovation for environmental friendly products manufactured here.

  • Utilize existing tax supported agencies such as NIST manufacturing centers to: Define and teach best practices to manufacturers through shared network of knowledge resources; Benchmark on the successes -- Toyota, Wiremold, Danaher Corp. and employ proven lean executives on oversight boards; Challenge "economy of scale" thinking and standard cost accounting for more market-based accounting systems; Focus on small businesses or start-up companies and nurture "incubator green manufacturing zones";

I do not agree with some of Mr. Madigan's points in the article (his take on productivity, for example) but I wholeheartedly agree with it in spirit.

We need a bold initiative, similar to the U.S. Apollo or Russia's Luna programs, that will stimulate our collective creativity and find real solutions while creating wealth.

According to NASA, there have been over 1500 "spinoff" technologies from the Apollo lunar program to benefit business, health and wealth. We need that now, but on a global scale. The problem is too large, too complex and affects too many of us politically to tackle it in a vacuum.

I hope that we can find the resolve to address this as one people - for all of us, including manufacturing.

Happy Independence Day to all of you, no matter where you are.

0 Comments Permalink
1

Are Multinationals Really That Bad?

Posted by aj Jul 1, 2008

In the New York Times this past Sunday, I found a book review that struck me as a balanced take on the true role of large companies in the global economy. The review is of a book that strikes me as a balanced take on the true role of large companies in the global economy.

That's right, I'm recommending a book I've yet to read. Get over it - I ordered it from Amazon already.

The article, "The American Multinational, Unbowed, reviews the book titled "Globality: Competing with Everyone from Everywhere for Everything.

globality.jpg

What sold me on the book?

While the consensus is that U.S. (and, I believe, any) multinationals are under serious threat from foreign competitors like Tata or Cemex, the facts are that these behemoths are much more competent and capable than their size or age suggest. The book - via the article - is said to point to 5 core strengths that are often overlooked:

  • Human Capital - While most of what we hear is that China and India are creating more engineers and technologists than the U.S., those countries face challenges of extremely high turnover rates, language barriers (most are not fluent in English - only marginally competent), most require further training beyond university, and many indigenous companies can't offer career paths that attract and keep talent.

  • International Agility - Conglomerates and multinationals are actually more agile and adept in foreign markets than they're given credit for.

  • Mergers & Acquisitions - Western companies have the capital and experience to consistently expand themselves or eliminate competition - much more so than their international competitors.

  • Technology Innovation - Again, more capital and experience at functioning openly with other cultures give multinationals the edge.

  • Brand Strength - Coke. Google. American Express. Enough said.

The authors sure son't seem to be poo-pooing the emerging challenges from other markets and countries. U.S. manufacturers - especially the large ones - have bureaucracies and administrative layers that can certainly block progress. And these emerging markets are growing at incredible rates of scale.

But many conglomerates have overcome these impediments by learning to do business in the very countries that are seen as challengers. For example, the authors point out that General Motors was the number 1 in China car sales in 2007, and it is beating Toyota in other markets (Brazil, India and Russia).

We don't hear much about that in the mainstream media. That's why I'm looking for good things from this book.

1 Comments Permalink

MFGx Blog