(Manufacturing Transformation – Jon Wikstrom: 6-30-16)   Do your manufacturing processes still rely on analog or paper-based components?   Perhaps now is the time to embrace digitization as a strategy?

As you read this article, the manufacturing industry is moving towards a fourth massive revolution.

The first came in the 18th century in Britain, when machines started arriving in textile mills across the continent and the second came when Henry Ford introduced the world to the powers of mass production.

Since then manufacturing practices remained pretty static until the advent of the computer, which set in motion a series of technology advances that are now gaining momentum. The addition of the Internet to devices promises to further accelerate the innovation that is to come.

We live in a time when a number of very useful technologies are only just beginning to converge. With new materials, innovative software, more capable machines and better processes, we are in the midst of a perfect storm for evolution in the manufacturing industry.

And it won’t be long before many of today’s practices become obsolete, or even illegal.

Here I take a look at five common manufacturing practices I believe won’t survive the next decade.

Reliance on Human Labor.  At the start of the first industrial revolution, factories had to be run around the clock in order to be profitable, so workers often toiled away for up to 16 hours a day. Although conditions have changed dramatically in the developed world, you still can’t go more than a few weeks without reading about a sweatshop in Bangladesh, forced labor in Qatar or child labor in India.

This may be on the cusp of change though. Factories have been using automated robots in some form since the 1960’s. Now these bots have evolved enough to take over many of the repetitive tasks humans used to do in factories.

This is one of the reasons companies like Apple and GM have been shifting jobs back to the US for the first time in many decades. Robots can work day and night, be more precise and don’t need to be paid. Advanced robotics will most likely make many repetitive, assembly jobs obsolete in the coming years, both in developed and developing nations. Our human resources will then need to be applied to the programming of processes and optimization of production throughput instead.

Analog to Digital Management.  Digital technologies have transformed many industries in the past decade alone. In the coming decade they are expected to dramatically change the way manufacturing operates. For example, the convergence of virtual and real worlds in manufacturing is now in full swing. Digitization has also enabled the introduction of mobile apps across the shop floor, which can help assure quality, maintain labor records, track vehicles and shipments, and provide high-quality data all in real time. Legacy paper-based, analog systems will soon be virtually non-existent as the digital revolution continues its transformation.

Two-Dimensions.  If you’d mentioned printing to anyone prior to a few years ago, nearly everyone would have talked to you about home computers and paper. If you’d mentioned machines that could print real 3D objects like toys and bricks and even cars, they would have assumed you were talking about the latest sci-fi blockbuster.

But 3D printing is very much a reality now and is become a bigger part of practical engineering every day. After years of research and development, we’re finally able to produce objects by creating designs on a computer and having a printer lay it down, layer after layer, till we’ve made something from the inside-out.

Also known as Additive manufacturing, this process will undoubtedly change the way we produce objects. There are already ideas for creating lighter airplane wings and complex prosthetics with the technology.  While the next decade may not see us depending entirely on 3D printing, you can be sure that a great many will incorporate the printers for some components of their production.

Wasting Water.  It’s not often given much thought, but a staggering amount of water is used for cleaning at different stages of the manufacturing process. The traditional processes result in a great deal of waste water, hazardous materials and messy residues.

Using water in this way is not only inefficient but also an environmental hazard, especially considering the fact that many places in the world are starting to experience more and more water shortage crises.  It’s clear that the use of water in manufacturing has to be seriously rethought in order for manufacturing to be at all sustainable for the planet and human survival.

But how do you replace water? On example being used at innovative companies is the use of carbon dioxide (CO₂), which can be stored in liquid or gaseous form. The gas is recycled from other industrial processes and is, thus, very eco-friendly. And, CO₂ can be used to clean anything from clothes to complex medical equipment. It’s easy to obtain, cheap to use, very effective and leaves no residue.

Traditional Hierarchies.  With the rapid rate at which new technologies are developing, it is starting to make less and less sense to have distinct separations between the production and engineering teams. Given the fact that participating in the line at almost any level will soon involve some expertise in engineering and robotics, more and more companies are moving towards vertical relationships between employees at every level.

Furthermore, the level of education and knowledge necessary to work at the operating level will be higher than it’s ever been before.  Companies that want to retain their experienced and loyal operations teams will now have to begin training them for a different kind of work requiring more advanced skill sets.

Technology is developing at an exponential rate that will only become more rapid in the years to come. Simultaneously, environmental concerns are becoming such that the government is intervening in order to force corporations to change the way they do things.

These and other factors are combining to make dramatic change imminent in the manufacturing industry.  As has always been true on the eve of massive shifts, those who want to stay relevant and successful will innovate. Those who don’t will soon find their skills in less demand.

(Jon Wikstrom is a technology and manufacturing writer, former U.S. Air Force Reserves Major and the founder and CEO of Cool Clean Technologies, a company that designs custom dry CO2 cooling and cleaning systems for a wide variety of industries.)

Related articles:

Manufacturing Transformation and the People Challenge

The Evolution of the Supply Chain [INFOGRAPHIC]

The 4th Industrial Revolution is Coming – But What Is It?

(strategy+business – Daniel Gross: 9-7-16)   America has a long-running crisis in manufacturing employment. Quite simply, year after year, the number of people employed in making things declines — the figure is down by nearly 5 million since 1996. And in election years like this one, it is common to hear politicians talk about how they will bring manufacturing jobs back.

Across the board — on both sides of the aisle, in every part of the country — there is an overwhelming desire to have more manufacturing jobs. This is partly due to nostalgia and symbolism. But it’s also driven largely by economics: Generally speaking, the manufacturing jobs that have been lost (and that remain) offer better pay, benefits, and job security than the service jobs that have replaced them. What’s more, manufacturing has a big multiplier effect — when you build machines at a factory, it calls an array of suppliers and service providers into action. Thanks to the power of manufacturing’s economic impact, states and cities are often willing to offer significant financial incentives to companies that are willing to open plants.

Now, if they were being honest, politicians would note that the vast majority of the millions of manufacturing jobs lost can’t return. They left due to globalization and competition. And many were rendered obsolete by technology. The reality is that the value and volume of stuff factories produce tends to rise each year, even if employment falls, because software, machines, and computers are doing more of the work.

However, there are at least a few hundred thousand manufacturing posts that could be “brought back” without turning back the clock on globalization and making factories less productive. All that would have to happen is for America’s companies to fill the hundreds of thousands of open positions.

I’ve written before about the strange state of affairs in the job market. Markets everywhere have become more efficient, thanks to technology and brilliant new platforms that grant buyers and sellers of goods and services the ability to meet one another online and agree on product and prices. And yet the labor market has become less efficient. As the most recent JOLTS report notes, there were some 5.6 million jobs open in the U.S. at the end of June, up from 2.4 million in June 2009. If human resources professionals could be 10 percent more effective at filling posts than they are, there would be an additional 560,000 people working today.

Last week, the Wall Street Journal noted that a decent chunk of those openings are in manufacturing. “The number of open manufacturing jobs has been rising since 2009, and this year stands at the highest level in 15 years, according to Labor Department data,” the Journal reported. “Openings for manufacturing jobs this year have averaged 353,000 a month, up from 311,000 in 2015 and 122,000 in 2009.” That’s a lot!  There are 12.28 million manufacturing jobs total in the U.S., and in the past year, 39,000 have been lost.

To put it differently: If U.S. manufacturers were willing and able to fill the positions they have open, we’d be bringing manufacturing jobs back in a big way.

So why isn’t it happening? How can it be that the number of manufacturing openings has tripled in the past seven years even as millions of manufacturing workers have been forced to find other work? Well, it’s complicated.

Markets may be efficient most of the time, but they’re far from perfect. It could be that there are lots of openings in geographic regions where the population has been declining. It could be that employers, who have to compete for labor in ways they haven’t had to in more than a decade — the unemployment rate is just 4.9 percent — aren’t offering enough money to lure workers away from their current jobs.

But in manufacturing, there’s something else at work. As the Journal noted, the manufacturing industry has changed a great deal in recent years. It is more technology-intensive, more specialized, and depends on higher-value-added goods. As is the case with many other professions — including journalism and retail — the jobs have evolved to the point where they are fundamentally different. It’s one thing to weld a fender to a car body; it’s quite another to program, manage, and maintain the machines and robots that do the welding. All of which is to say that the level of skills and competencies manufacturing employers are seeking in their employees may be significantly higher than the level they were seeking 10, or 20, or 30 years ago.

In most instances, especially in service industries such as retail and food service, labor shortages can be solved by the simple application of higher wages. But when it comes to manufacturing, higher wages may be only part of the solution. Sure, you can entice a skilled operator of machine tooling to walk across the street by doubling her salary. But if the market — i.e., other companies, the educational system, and training programs — hasn’t been endowing sufficient numbers of workers with those skills, higher pay will only get you so far.

The most direct way to bring back manufacturing jobs, then, may be for companies to decide that they are prepared to invest in programs or direct efforts that will produce workers with the skills they need. The solution to outsourcing production elsewhere may be to insource training.

(Daniel Gross is executive editor of strategy+business.)

(IW – Ed Potoczak: 9-6-16)    Manufacturers must do more than promote the “coolness” of today’s technologies. They need to communicate the educational requirements for succeeding in manufacturing careers, so that students can understand the skills they will need.

There’s no doubt: Manufacturers today are stuck between a rock and hard place. On the one hand, many face an aging workforce that may retire without sharing key knowledge. In fact, the Pew Research Center predicts that 10,000 baby boomers will retire each day over the next 19 years.

On the other, some 80% of businesses are struggling to bring new talent into the door and up through the ranks. Unless things change, 2 million jobs will go unfilled even as manufacturers face a growing skills gap on their teams.

Clearly, it’s a complex challenge, one that won’t be solved by a single silver bullet. However a number of innovative manufacturers, generational researchers and talent acquisition professionals have developed effective strategies for attracting, engaging, developing and retaining the team members who will be central to driving manufacturing businesses forward.

Here is a look at the most promising of those strategies:

Update Manufacturing’s Reputation

Attracting a new generation of employees first means changing outdated pre-conceptions about the industry. Despite decades of advances, many people visualize an antiquated manufacturing scenario with equipment straight out of the Industrial Age. They have little understanding of how advances in computer-aided design, 3D printing, robotics and computer numerical control (CNC) machining, among others, drive modern manufacturing operations.

Manufacturers should consider ongoing initiatives to engage with the community, whether that involves regularly scheduled manufacturing tours, joint career education initiatives at colleges and high schools, virtual events or social media engagement.

One of the best platforms for educating students and parents is Manufacturing Day, which aims to address misperceptions by showing what manufacturing is—and isn’t. More than 733 events across North America are scheduled around Manufacturing Day 2016, which is set for October 7. It is not too late to host an event or join an existing one this year by visiting MFG DAY.

Manufacturers also must do more than promote the “coolness” of today’s technologies. They need to communicate the educational requirements for succeeding in manufacturing careers, so that students can understand the skills they will need. And with millennials’ desire to make a difference, manufacturers should provide insights into how employees can contribute to the success of the company and customers, as well as participate in any corporate causes.  

Broaden the Potential Talent Pool

Millennials will be key to long-term growth, but manufacturers should not discount GenXers seeking new opportunities or a career shift. GenXers are tech-literate, and the youngest of the generation will be working for another 25-30 years. Moreover, with many having started families, GenXers tend to value job stability. By contrast, research indicates that more than 90% of millennial workers will leave a job after less than three years.

Go “Old School” and Invest in Internships

Whether recruiting millennials or GenXers, many industries require specialized expertise that is difficult to learn in a classroom or doesn’t transfer well from other job experiences. Savvy manufacturers are investing in internships to help people develop these specialized skills—whether to build products or provide maintenance for sophisticated systems.

A blue ribbon program is Aviation High School in Long Island City, N.Y. Accredited by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the school works with John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK) to provide airline maintenance certification. Some 2,200 students take standard high school classes, but they also attend courses on the mechanics of how a jet airplane operates and get hands-on experience with maintenance. When students graduate, they earn both a diploma and a certificate to work in the aviation industry.

Manufacturers do not need to be Fortune 500 companies to offer internships. Many mom-and-pop shops and mid-size firms also offer part-time after-school jobs and individual internships through partnerships with local high schools and community colleges. Other manufacturers work with government agencies, career assistance organizations, or other non-profits. Companies may find that they qualify for federal, state and local economic development funds to create skilled-trades apprenticeship training programs.

50 Strong, a subsidiary of mid-size manufacturer Precision Thermoplastic Components, is taking another approach. It has launched the 50 Strong Foundation, which awards scholarships to those engaged in or interested in pursuing careers in manufacturing. The scholarship assists recipients with the cost of attending a technical, vocational or trade school in order to enhance their manufacturing skills and knowledge.

Engage New Employees

Millenials want to tackle new challenges and opportunities, and boredom is a deal-breaker. This is good news for manufacturing, which thrives on innovation and has been so transformed that it is nearly unrecognizable to people familiar with the factories of 20 years ago.

With this in mind, manufacturers should be prepared to assign meaningful responsibilities to new employees, not simply have them “pay their dues” with menial tasks. When there is a real need for new hires to assist in administrative cleanup, managers should provide a perspective on how this less-than-exciting work helps colleagues and even customers.

Management teams should also seek to engage employees, whether Millennials or GenXers, by asking them to consider developmental assignments in particular areas of the company, listening to their goals and hopes for enrichment or advancement and then mapping out personalized career plans with them. Also consider assigning a member of senior management to serve as an executive mentor to advise them on how to add more value to their work and the business. Don’t limit mentoring to new hires; it can also unlock untapped potential among current employees.

Build Cohesive, Cross-Generational Teams

Beyond formal mentorship, consider establishing cross-generational project teams or special committees. Newer employees can gain important knowledge and build their skill sets from senior team leads. Meanwhile, more experienced employees should be encouraged to take advantage of the enthusiasm, creativity and comfort with technology that the younger generation brings.

To ensure the success of these teams, it is important for everyone to recognize the differing values and motivators for each generation, and that no one perspective is best. Millennials tend to be collaborative and tech-savvy, and they desire to make a difference early in their tenure. GenXers usually are self-reliant and analytical, and they want work/life balance. Boomers were raised with a strong work ethic, and they focus on process, desire personal gratification and are determined to perform well. Like Millennials, they tend to be optimistic. Senior management, in particular, should incorporate this understanding in strategies to create a culture, policies and plans that empower members of each generation to be successful contributors.

Empower Teams Through Technology

Cross-generational teams help foster knowledge transfer from the Baby Boomers, who are thinking about retiring, to younger team members. However, it is also important to invest in technology to capture vital company information. This may take the form of audio/video recordings of employees explaining key processes or a document management system that catalogs and stores work instructions and other data.

Using technology will make the work environment more appealing to tech-savvy millennial and GenX employees. They rely on smartphones, tablets and web apps that store, organize, search and display information on an almost unlimited number of topics in business and technology, and they want to have the same power and flexibility at work. Additionally, many modern enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems help minimize redundant work that frustrates all employees, empowering all team members to become more productive.

(Ed Potoczak, IQMS industry manager, brings extensive expertise in manufacturing and engineering; he is certified in Design for Manufacture and Assembly and Value Analysis/Value Engineering.)

Popular Now:

You Can’t Stop Supply Chain Risk — You Can Only Hope to Contain It

10 Labor Changes You Should Know About

The Real Cost of Rudeness

A rational explanation of the two divergent views of U.S. manufacturing’s future.

(IW – Becky Morgan: 9-7-16)    It is true that some U.S. headquartered companies are shutting down operations here and moving them to Mexico or elsewhere. It is also true that some U.S. companies are reshoring their operations to the U.S. We are undergoing a significant adjustment in the location of manufacturing operations around the world. It’s a logical one, especially following the often short-sighted decision to chase cheap Asian labor several years ago. But it’s also a strategic one.

So what can we expect?

A continuation of this relocation process over at least the next decade.  Why?

Because just as “right-sizing” occurs as markets shift, so will “right-locating.” Sometimes this is to correct prior bad decisions; occasionally because of changing strategies; often because of the pursuit of new markets. The decision of where to locate manufacturing operations is not a simple one, especially as global environments change. And this is true for global companies headquartered around the world, not just those here.

Why has Toyota invested in significant manufacturing capability in North America? Because it believes in locating in its major markets. It is a strategy they continually evaluate and, so far, continually implement. With multiple foreign companies producing in the U.S. and U.S. companies producing worldwide, “buy American” is confusing at best.

Why are major U.S. manufacturers moving facilities? Primarily for two reasons: (1) to be close to their markets, and (2) to reduce costs. Globalization leads the first. The second is a bit tougher to generalize. The short-term focus on earnings that executives of publicly held U.S. companies have results from compensation plans and the active stock market here. Accounting rules often support those short-term decisions, at the expense of long-term thinking. And unfortunately, too many executives make choices aimed at minimizing taxes rather than creating a thriving future for their company. But those factors don’t mean that all decisions to locate abroad are bad ones. A company must be competitive and frequently that impacts optimum production location.

Lamentably, MillerCoors recently decided to shutter one of the best plants I’ve ever seen in favor of one a bit newer about 200 miles away. The Eden, N.C., operations team had created an outstanding culture and was regularly named one of the best U.S. plants in the company, but that wasn’t enough. The newer facility in Virginia may quickly become just as good, but tell that to the former employees in North Carolina. This was a market access decision initiated by declining demand. A business decision, as they say. While that feels cold, the reality is the company had to right-size, which in this case also meant “right-locate.

Mergers, divestitures, infrastructure, capital requirements, work contracts, laws and regulations, water access and availability of a qualified workforce all impact location decisions. So does the location of markets and raw materials. Top executives who make these determinations, virtually always after an extensive study of options, are rarely bad people. They have multiple constituencies to consider, and employees are only one of those. An important one, but only one.

Effective product design coupled with speed-to-market with market-verified products can make labor costs inconsequential. But that doesn’t mean locating capacity in the U.S. is more attractive.  It just eliminates one of the simple factors that begat the offshoring craze several years ago.

Manufacturing is not dead, nor is it dying. As with anything else, it evolves. The how and the where are rapidly changing now for reasons we can expect to continue for at least a decade, if not longer.

New technologies and increasing expectations of immediate delivery are accelerating relocation decisions for both market and cost reasons.

So where is manufacturing really going?  Towards speed, technology, and a qualified workforce.  Wherever that may be tomorrow. If we want manufacturing to remain strong in the United States, focus on improving those factors that matter most.

(Becky Morgan is President, Fulcrum ConsultingWorks Inc.)

(Reshoring Initiative Blog — Sandy Montalbano D’Amico: 8-20-16)    Industry 4.0 is defined as a fourth wave of technological advancement, driven by nine technology advances that will increase manufacturing productivity and increase competitiveness in manufacturing industries.

According to the Boston Consulting Group (BCG), “In this transformation, sensors, machines, workpieces and IT systems will be connected along the value chain beyond a single enterprise. These connected systems (also referred to as cyber physical systems) can interact with one another using standard Internet-based protocols and analyze data to predict failure, configure themselves, and adapt to changes. Industry 4.0 will make it possible to gather and analyze data across machines, enabling faster, more flexible, and more efficient processes to produce higher-quality goods at reduced costs.”

A Level Playing Field

Industry 4.0 has the potential to level the global playing field for U.S. firms and give them the opportunity to reshore more U.S. manufacturing. As American companies adopt a more comprehensive total cost analysis, they are finding that rising offshore labor rates combined with other “hidden costs” of offshoring often counterbalance any remaining savings from cheap price or labor abroad. They are also finding that separating research and development from manufacturing has a negative impact on innovation.

American companies that more accurately evaluate sourcing alternatives and adopt 4.0 technologies will be in an optimum position to increase competitiveness, take advantage of the benefits of localization, and manufacture profitably in the U.S. for the North American market.

The Future of Productivity and Growth

The Fourth Industrial Revolution was the focus of this year’s World Economic Forum meeting in Davos. The scope and impact of this industrial revolution is expected to be transformational, and disrupt almost every industry in every country, changing entire systems of production, management, and governance. According to the global agenda, “there is clear evidence that the technologies that underpin the Fourth Industrial Revolution are having a major impact on businesses.” A recent BCG report shows how connectivity and interaction among parts, machines, and humans will make production systems as much as 30 percent faster and 25 percent more efficient. Industry 4.0 has the potential to have a dramatic impact on U.S. manufacturing competitiveness and reshoring of U.S. jobs.

The Challenge for the United States

According to the Reshoring Initiative data report, the bleeding of manufacturing jobs to offshore has stopped. Reshoring, including FDI, balanced offshoring in 2015 as it did in 2014. In comparison, in 2000-2007 the United States had a net loss of about 200,000 manufacturing jobs per year to offshoring.

According to Reshoring Initiative calculations, about 265,000 manufacturing jobs have been brought to the U.S. from offshore in the last seven years. That job gain is the result of both new reshoring—the return of manufacturing work by U.S. headquartered companies—and foreign direct investment (FDI) in the manufacturing sector by foreign headquartered companies. Those 265,000 jobs represent about 30% of the total increase in U.S. manufacturing jobs since the recent low of 11.45 million in February 2010.

Now, the challenge is to bring back another 3-4 million manufacturing jobs that are still offshore as measured by our $500 billion/year trade deficit. 
Between the health of the industry overall and the balancing of the job flow, the beginnings of a manufacturing renaissance are evident, but many actions are required to maintain the momentum.

How Modern Technology Solutions and Better Sourcing Decisions Impact Reshoring

We need continuous improvement in operations and in sourcing decisions to make domestic production the clear first choice in more cases.

Corporate Investment

The benefit of Industry 4.0 for U.S. companies is the increased productivity and efficiency that enable more flexible and efficient processes to produce higher-quality goods at reduced costs. The first step then must be continued corporate investment in the nine technologies that are transforming industrial production – the building blocks of Industry 4.0:

• Big data and analytics
• Robots
• Simulation
• Horizontal and Vertical System Integration
• The Industrial Internet of Things
• Cyber Security
• The Cloud
• Additive Manufacturing
• Augmented Reality

Government Action

Second, government action to make the U.S. more competitive: skills training, lower nominal corporate tax rate, and a combination of an overall lower USD and an end of offshore currency manipulation.

Better Sourcing Decisions

Third, consistent, disciplined use of Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) analysis so companies recognize that domestic manufacture is in most cases their best choice.

Reporting Success Stories

Finally, thorough reporting on reshoring success stories so that corporations realize that reshoring is worth reevaluating and investing in … and so prospective skilled workers realize that their best career opportunities might again be in manufacturing.

The Winning Strategy

The impact of offshoring on the U.S. economy and the environment has been significant. According to the Economic Policy Institute, the growing U.S. trade deficit with China alone cost 3.2 million jobs between 2001 and 2013. Job losses occurred in every state, primarily in manufacturing. Offshored jobs have diminished American employment opportunities, helped contribute to wage erosion, had a dramatic and negative effect on the domestic economy, and negatively impacted the environment through higher carbon emissions and other pollution from some developing countries and from long distance transport.

The winning strategy is balancing the trade deficit with a strong investment in new technology and skills training and increased corporate use of total cost for sourcing and plant siting decisions.

By reducing our trade deficit, reshoring has the potential to increase US manufacturing by 25%, curtail unemployment and the budget deficit, improve income equality, strengthen our defense industry and motivate skilled workforce recruitment. Achieving this potential requires your help at your company and in your community!

In summary, Industry 4.0 solutions give manufacturers the tools to increase speed to market, and boost productivity and the competitiveness needed to support reshoring efforts.

*******

The Reshoring Initiative provides a broad range of free resources to bring back more manufacturing, including:

• Total Cost of Ownership Estimator® — A free online tool to help OEMs evaluate sourcing alternatives and suppliers.
• Reshoring Library — Contains 3500+ linked articles on reshoring. See what your competitors are reshoring. Learn from them. See what companies in your customers’ industries are reshoring. Sell to them.
• Case Studies — Submit your own reshoring case for free publicity and to make reshoring more visible. Receive a free “Manufacturing is Cool” T-shirt.
• Economic Development Program — Strengthen your region by replacing imports with local production, ideally yours. Have your local economic developers contact us.

(Sandy Montalbano D’Amico is Consultant to the Reshoring Initiative®)

The brilliant factory is GE’s new take on how we make things. It involves machines are embedded with sensors and connected to the Industrial Internet. The factory uses GE’s Predix software platform to stream data …more….

Read the full article at www.gereports.com.

(IW – Adrienne Selko: 8-25-16)     From January 2010 until July 2016 the Reshoring Initiative estimates that 265,000 jobs have come back to the United States from abroad.

The Reshoring Initiative’s 2015 Reshoring Report found that the reasons companies gave for coming back to the U.S. included:

• Government incentives
• Ecosystems/localization
• Proximity to customers
• Skilled workforce

At the same time, companies cited lower quality, supply interruption (this category had the largest increase from last year), high freight costs and delivery as leading problems offshore. Cumulatively, rising wages and total cost have been major drivers in reshoring decisions.

Regionally, the trend remained strongest in the Southeast and Texas, but in 2015 the West displaced the Midwest to hold second place for most jobs shifted from offshore.

See below the list of some of the companies that have brought jobs back. The list was compiled by the Reshoring Initiative for 24/7 Wall St. and is based on company announcements.

Ford – 3200 jobs that went to Georgia

Boeing – 2200 jobs that went to Missouri

General Electric – 2656 jobs that went to Kentucky, New York and Ohio

General Motors – 2345 jobs that went to Tennessee and Michigan

Caterpillar – 2100 jobs that went to Georgia and Texas

Flextronics – 1700 jobs that went to Texas

Farouk Systems – 1200 jobs that went to Texas

Mars – 1000 jobs that went to Kansas

Increasingly efficient manufacturing processes are poised to accelerate commercialization of clean technologies.

(GreenBiz – Lauren Hepler: 8-23-16)    From solar panels a decade ago to energy storage today, the history of clean tech is littered with capital-intensive concepts poised to radically alter the relationship between industrialized society and the environment.

But why do these widely heralded breakthroughs always seem to limp along so slowly when it comes to actually hitting the market? The dreaded valley of death between conception and commercialization is one increasingly recognized explanation, dooming novel technologies to relegation in never-ending pilot projects as follow-on investment lags.

For Mark Johnson, the Department of Energy’s resident innovation expert, the real problem often boils down to production. That is, not just inventing a new energy-centric technologies, but making sure those new tools can be reliably made in a cost-effective manner.

“We can do a lot to invent new technologies relevant to energy,” Johnson, director of the DOE’s Advanced Manufacturing Office, told GreenBiz. “But where you get those real breakthrough adoption moments is when the technology drives to the point where it reaches cost parity because of manufacturing innovation.”

The “maker” craze has gripped consumer imagination in the form of 3D-printed plastic trinkets. Meanwhile, government labs and corporate innovation clusters at automakers, electronics giants and all manner of other companies are focused on advanced manufacturing at scale.

It’s a field that encompasses everything from additive manufacturing to high-tech materials to Internet of Things sensors to a range of robotics possibilities, with the latter poised to crack open a Pandora’s box of labor automation anxiety.

Johnson’s agency aims to help make sense of it all, particularly as the world grapples with fallout from fossil fuel-powered manufacturing and a shift toward renewable energy.

The Advanced Manufacturing Institute has embarked on a number of efforts aimed at not just inventing and patenting new technologies related to energy generation, grid integration and related areas, but also building better infrastructure for advanced manufacturing techniques that they hope will wring waste — and costs — out of the production process.

Those efforts include a network of 15 new U.S. “manufacturing innovation institutes” promised by President Barack Obama in his last State of the Union address. A separate Smart Manufacturing Institute based at the University of California, Los Angeles is one of multiple public-private efforts aimed at advancing nascent energy technologies with a potential manufacturing efficiency upside, such as applying Internet of Things connectivity and data analytics to factories.

The promise of advanced manufacturing doesn’t stop with products explicitly associated with clean energy, though.  The overall goal of the Clean Energy Manufacturing Initiative at the DOE is “to increase U.S. competitiveness in manufacturing clean energy technologies and increase U.S. manufacturing competitiveness across the board by boosting energy productivity and leveraging low-cost domestic energy resources and feedstocks.”

Where you get those real breakthrough adoption moments is when the technology drives to the point where it reaches cost parity because of manufacturing innovation.

That could mean finding ways to economically produce lighter-weight consumer vehicles, or, as the energy agency’s new REMADE program hopes to do, encouraging more aggressive recycling or circular economy approaches to production.

Still, increasingly fragmented global supply chains complicate the production puzzle. It’s not just businesses, but also their many suppliers wrestling with the financial and technical feasibility of major manufacturing upgrades.

“We don’t have vertically integrated companies anymore,” Johnson said. “Ford controlled everything from iron mines to dealerships they could get the value out of everything in that supply chain. Now they have tier 1, tier 2, tier 3 suppliers.”

The challenge now is getting all those moving parts working together, particularly as the DOE and a range of consortia partners such as federal laboratories and universities blaze the trail on nascent clean technologies.

Moving the needle on manufacturing

Manufacturing is by no means a monolithic category.  From small-scale upcycled products to massive factories churning out cars, textiles or smartphones, the scope and environmental impact of manufacturing operations varies dramatically by scale and geography.

At a high level, however, federal data from recent years does show that the way we power production systems is beginning to change. As global energy intensity falls, the U.S. Energy Information Agency also documented a 17 percent decline in manufacturing energy consumption from 2002 to 2010, with the coal, oil and petrochemical industries remaining the biggest users in production.

“If you look at the use of energy in the manufacturing sector, over half of that energy goes to just a limited set of energy-intensive industries,” Johnson said.

Producing the ethylene that serves as the foundation of the myriad plastics used in different products is one of the most energy-intensive industrial processes, along with production of ammonia for use in fertilizer, he said. Pulp and paper and primary metals manufacturing are also both energy- and resource-intensive.

Advanced materials such as carbon fiber and graphene represent one field that could start changing the way a range of products are made — if it makes sense to make them in the first place.

“The challenge is that the cost is about three to four times higher than the cost of competing materials,” Johnson said, noting that the process of making carbon fiber is both time- and capital-intensive.

Going in circles — in a good way

In addition to the emissions and ecological impacts that can result from heavy manufacturing, there’s also the issue of waste to contend with.

“Up to 50 percent of the materials we produce wind up in a landfill within 12 months of their production,” Johnson said. “The embodied energy — in other words, all the energy it took to make those things — is essentially being put into a landfill.”

That’s where he hopes some circular logic can come in handy.

Rather than trashing used products, their packaging and other manufacturing scraps, Johnson hopes to use them as “feedstocks” for new things — a core tenet of the circular economy push among sustainability advocates for production built on reuse rather than non-renewable virgin materials.

“Can you use those wasted materials, whether it’s at the end of life or used as some mid-stream product, and wind up actually using it again?” he said. “The limiting factors are cost and energy.”

A range of companies are already experimenting in the space, although what’s really a variation on recycling and what represents a truly circular model varies depending on who you ask.

Tech companies such as Apple are focused on cutting e-waste by investing in reverse logistics, in this case iPhone-dismantling robots, to break down — and ideally, to find and repurpose — electronics components. In an example from the world of weird materials, Ford is partnering with Jose Cuervo to evaluate ways to use agave left over from tequila production in bioplastic car parts.

While the possibilities are vast, Johnson said the breakthroughs for clean energy manufacturing ultimately will have to come from the supply chain.

“A lot of OEMs have sustainability programs, whether its automotive, aviation, textiles,” he said. “What they need is a supply chain that can wind up applying those processes.“

Stuck in the Industrial Age, skills training doesn’t place enough emphasis on smart, connected product manufacturing, advanced material development and digital design integration.

(IW – Randy Swearer: 8-23-16)    If you’ve read the Manufacturing Institute report, you’ve heard the statistics: 84% of manufacturing executives believe there is a talent shortage in the U.S. and worry that they won’t find the workforce they need to keep up with the increasingly more advanced and sophisticated demands of the industry.

And talent is the number one driver of global manufacturing competitiveness.

So why can’t manufacturers find and attract skilled talent?

One reason is that our manufacturing education system is stuck in the old Industrial Age of metalworking and welding. It doesn’t place enough emphasis on smart, connected product manufacturing, advanced material development and digital design integration.

Due to this gap, students—your next potential employees—may not be aware of exciting developments like 3-D prototyping and printing taking place within the industry or the multitude of careers available to them.

With the world economy placing a higher value on advanced manufacturing, we need to place a higher value on advancing manufacturing education.

Here are some ways we can build a more advanced and dynamic workforce:   

Create Hands-on Opportunities Within Education Systems 

As with most disciplines at the university level, manufacturing curricula in fields like engineering, software development and IT are still taught from a textbook. The setting and structure take away the hands-on, real-world learning that students could be experiencing. They miss out on the exciting part, and don’t really understand what manufacturing is like on a day-to-day basis.

Businesses and educational institutions need to work together to develop new curricula that provide hands-on, learning-through-making opportunities.

We are beginning to see the success of these collaborative learning environments at several universities, such as Rochester Institute of Technology’s Studio 9.30, a multidisciplinary studio focused on the development of health-technology products that benefit community partners. Penn State Behrend’s new Advancing Manufacturing and Innovation Center provides a space for academic and industry partners to collaborate on research and manufacturing projects.

Not only will these students have real-world experience, but they will also understand the vast changes and advancements that are taking place within our industry.

Focus on Real-world Application of Skills

As long as traditional grades continue to be the marker for success at higher institutes of learning, students won’t gain the critical hands-on education to prepare them for their future careers.

According to the 2014 U.S. Department of Labor report, 65% of careers that students will be taking on in the future don’t exist today. Therefore, the chasm between what students learn in their current classroom environment and the expectation for skills in the real world is wide and difficult to breach.

This gap will only close if universities take a bold approach and redefine what success means and how students get there. For example, an influx of teachers is utilizing online platforms to help students publish work done outside of the classroom, so it can be accounted for as part of the curriculum. Through learning platforms, employers are able to look for and assess design and engineering candidates beyond a letter grade by viewing an individual’s e-portfolio.

Georgia Institute of Technology student Israel Del Toro’s e-portfolio consists of hypothetical as well as real-world design projects he completed in and outside the classroom, such as a new hand-held power tool, an electric razor and an innovative light fixture.       

If you haven’t done so already, encourage your hiring managers to place value on applicants who have pursued external opportunities outside the classroom, and have something to show for it. 

Develop and Elevate Micro-credentialing Programs for Students and Employees

With school curricula slow to change, students are increasingly going across disciplines and outside of the classroom to learn new things and pursue their interests.

With the proliferation of organizations like General Assembly, Codecademy and even public makerspaces like TechShop, students not only want to learn new skills; they also want to be recognized for their accomplishments outside of school. With micro-credentialing and digital badges, they can highlight their new competencies to potential employers.

More than a hundred educational institutions, private companies and employment groups have banded together in a recent initiative called Connecting Credentials to make it easier for candidates and employers to build the skill sets they need. In addition, Certiport works with software companies to develop and administer certifications in specialized industry competencies, such as 3D design skills through AutoCAD and Autodesk Fusion 360 certifications. 

Both the talent gap and education divide are not going to be solved overnight. However, a good starting point is a collective conversation around advancing the education system to better fit this ever-changing industry. Ultimately, working together will lead us to a better-equipped advanced manufacturing workforce. 

(Randy Swearer is the vice president of global education experiences for the design and engineering software company Autodesk.)

Smart operations use pervasive data collection, advanced analytics, technology investments and deeper collaboration with partners to prepare their value streams for the next industrial revolution.

(MH&L – Staff: 8-15-16)   Over the next three years, a growing number of successful manufacturers will enhance their manufacturing processes with smart operations, a broader supply chain strategy that extends beyond the factory walls, according a UPS report, The Rise of Smart Operations: Reaching New Levels of Operational Excellence.

Smart operations use pervasive data collection, advanced analytics, technology investments and deeper collaboration with partners.

Lean and Six Sigma methods remain the standard for manufacturers, but continuous improvement has a downside, according to the report. Overly optimized processes can become inflexible, leaving the business unable to adjust rapidly to disruptions in the supply chain and changing customer demand.

However smart operations are better positioned than others to compete and in today’s fluctuating markets because increased visibility of inventory location and transportation allow companies to better analyze and quickly manage changes to their supply chain both upstream and downstream of the factory, the report says.

“Smart operations are crucial to the long-term success of manufacturing companies,” said Derrick Johnson, vice president of marketing at UPS. “The strategy enables manufacturers with limited resources to serve their increasingly demanding customers more flexibly.”

The report, which was done with IDC research firm, assessed how far along companies are in implementing smart operations. The report showed that 53% of companies were at a relatively low level of overall maturity. Still, 47% of the survey respondents said their company’s progress toward smart operations exceeded that of their peers.

There are five areas essential to smart operations:

• Connected products: Increasingly, industrial manufacturers sell products that are connected in the cloud. This connectivity allows companies to offer better maintenance service, which sometimes even generates new revenue streams.
• Connected assets: Manufacturers with connected assets are better able to monitor their operations to anticipate and even correct problems before they occur.
• Supply chain decision making: The data and analytic tools used in smart operations help manufacturers resolve issues in the supply chain faster.
• Buy-side value chain: Smart operations allow manufacturers to automate purchasing with their vendors and manage the inbound transportation of those supplies.
• Sell-side value chain: Smart operations allow manufacturers to change transportation modes and speeds as well as destinations based on shifting customer demand.