Gov’t v. MFG: Regulation and political dysfunction threaten growth

Government’s never been more involved in business. For Jay Timmons, President and CEO of the National Association of Manufacturing (NAM), this development has few upsides.

Timmons spoke in Denver last week at a business luncheon sponsored by CACI, the Colorado Association for Commerce and Industry, and took on much of the political establishment in recounting federal policy-maker’s lousy recent record of supporting manufacturing.

Refreshingly non-partisan in his takedown, Timmons asserted that neither political party is getting it right for business from Washington. Speaking on behalf of his 12,000-member organization, Timmons took aim at:

– The GOP House strategy to control the legislative agenda not through elections but with threats and political maneuvering.

– Bipartisan embrace of a growing regulatory framework, with over “3000 new regulations” foisted on business the past 20 years by both Republican and Democratic administrations.

– Including a “disappointing” raft of proposed regulations that may stifle shale gas development, which Timmons credited for fueling a manufacturing revival and adding as many as four million new energy jobs to the economy in recent years.

– The impact on competitiveness of the regulatory burden, where U.S. manufacturers pay an average of 20% more to make the same product as international competitors.

– The shortcomings of education and occupational training, where 82 percent of U.S. manufacturers have job openings they can’t fill due to a lack of qualified applicants.

Workforce issues are a widespread challenge here, with most firms profiled in CompanyWeek citing a lack of skilled labor as a challenge to growth. Timmons listed certification and immigration reform as policy priorities for NAM, including support of the immigration bill approved by the Senate earlier this year that remains stuck in the House.

It’s hard to miss how conventional wisdom may be changing with regard to long-standing business and political affiliations. NAM’s support of immigration reform including a “path to citizenship” runs counter to majority Republican congressional support. The dust-up over shutting down the government also strained established ties in a very public way.

How is it, asked someone incredulously, that Apple and others could possibly tilt toward the current administration as they did the past election? Timmons reminded the questioner that voters spoke clearly the past election; that the Republican spokesperson was “ineffective”.

A more accurate assessment is that Apple and other emerging powerhouse American brands view their future to be more closely aligned with important customer demo’s than with the political influence of the GOP. A downside may be that the progressive political agenda on the left often translates into a more activist governmental role in the economy — including an ever-expanding regulatory framework and development bureaucracy.

It’s evident that neither side is capturing the imagination of business, certainly not NAM’s leadership. And for manufacturers in need of regulatory relief, meaningful immigration and education reform, and cost certainty that inspires investors and motivates customers, government and its proxy network can seem more foe than friend at times.

Regional manufacturers to get a much-needed resource from Denver OED

I’ve written previously about the regional push to invest in manufacturing. Colorado and its neighbors, many with similar sized manufacturing sectors, are host to business interests seeking funding, an improved workforce, tools and expertise to drive new manufacturing activity.

Support varies but in Colorado several communities are poised to benefit from active partnerships between industry, trade and government. We continue to report on a quality group of manufacturers in Colorado Springs, where trade and economic development officials increasingly see value in supporting the sector. On the Western Slope, the success and high visibility of established brands and a burgeoning lifestyle manufacturing sector is turning heads. It’s easy to envision a new private/public partnership that would promote the formidable group of lifestyle companies that call the Steamboat-to-Durango corridor home.

Colorado’s largest concentration of makers and manufacturers is of course in Denver, and officials here seem intent on building-out a world-class manufacturing economy. Denver’s Mayor, Michael Hancock, and Paul Washington, his top economic development lieutenant, speak often of the city’s manufacturing assets as they also move to address challenges to growth, like developing a more robust occupational workforce.

Denver’s also beginning work on a much needed to tool to measure and track the city’s progress. I met recently with Bridget Strand, Ph.D, economist and management analyst for the Denver Office of Economic Development (OED) about the project to develop a Denver manufacturing index that would quantify the current state of its manufacturing sector and provide a framework to measure progress. The index will become a regular content feature at CompanyWeek.

“What we’re trying to accomplish,” says Strand who has experience in the financial sector as well as international think tanks in index creation, “is to benchmark the current health of the sector and its underlying industries. We then are able to track the growth or contraction of those industries to determine which areas are driving the growth and health of the overall manufacturing sector in the metro area. For example, sequestration may be impacting the aerospace and defense manufacturing while the locovore movement is driving higher demand in the food and beverage manufacturing industries and is supporting new entrepreneurism in those areas.”

This index will also help support the OED’s business retention, recruitment and small business advocacy goals as it can identify underrepresented areas of high performance and the success and demand for various industry outputs in the region. “The output of small, big, old and new manufacturing companies illustrates a perfect example of what the high tech, highly creative and passionate people in Colorado can create,” says Strand.

Denver’s effort could also become a template for the state and regional Colorado economic development entities, as there’s currently no uniform means to track growth across industry sectors nor agreement even on how to view manufacturing as a whole. I’ve argued that Colorado’s booming ‘lifestyle manufacturing’ sector, for example, deserves more attention in the broad scheme of things, given the alignment of these companies with everything Colorado should be promoting about its business community. Strand, and Denver, seem tuned-in to that imperative.

What’s clear through the weekly profiles in CompanyWeek is that manufacturers from across a dozen or so industry sectors share common challenges and needs, such as a more capable and qualified workforce. What should also be apparent is that collectively, they’re an engine of sustainable economic growth throughout the region. Providing the entire sector the tools to benchmark their current status and track progress is an important development.

Fretful investors leave small business guessing

It’s a fulltime job reading investor sentiment these days, and apparently a confusing one for the business press. On consecutive days last week, local reports had stocks rising one day and falling the next on news the Fed would continue ‘quantitative easing’.

There’s little confusion though about the difficulty Colorado small business is having raising capital. Money has always been the bane of start-ups and early stage companies, but today, it’s become an especially tough game. It’s leaving worthy companies without working capital and the service professionals who raise money and manage deal flow singing the blues.

“The rules have changed”, says Andrew Hurry, senior investment banker with The Yale Group, a FINRA-registered broker-dealer based in Denver. “There’s far less tolerance for risk, investors are looking for larger deals, they’re taking longer to close, and now both clients and investors are blowing up deals prior to closing. It’s often like holding two live snakes and not knowing which one will bite first.”

Hurry’s been raising capital for growth and early stage companies in Colorado and internationally for the dozen years or so I’ve known him. He describes a pervasive nervousness about the economy that’s fundamentally changed the investment landscape.

“I attended an Aspen Business Luncheon where John Calamos, a very well know asset manager, was the guest speaker. I couldn’t believe the questions I was hearing from an audience of very high net-worth individuals, like, ‘What will happen to the US economy when the dollar loses reserve currency status?’ or ‘What do we do now that we’ve lost the ability to use gold as a hedge against equities?’ The individuals weren’t asking how to grow their net worth. They were concerned about not losing the value of the current investments.”

The deals that are getting done tend to reflect this risk-averse sentiment. “When I started in investment banking back in 2000 many of my clients were pre-revenue healthcare and technology companies that were looking for capital to complete product development and get to market launch. Today, many VC’s are now looking at companies only with demonstrable and sustainable cash flows where their investment helps revenues and business grow; or help with execution on a business plan already in place. Deals that can be categorized as having no market risk, no technology risk, and no management risk”, Hurry explained.

“The result is that early stage companies have to be more creative in terms of sources of capital – friends, family, non-traditional lenders, crowd-funding – and do a lot more with a lot less resources.”

Hurry’s assessment isn’t a surprise for Colorado start-ups and growth companies. In the few short weeks we’ve published CompanyWeek I’ve met several entrepreneurs frustrated with the shifting investment sands. It’s no secret that the primary barrier to higher deal flow here is money, not a lack of ideas or risk-takers willing to set the wheels in motion to build a new company or follow a dream.

In Andrew Hurry and likely other investment bankers and brokers, Colorado entrepreneurs have an empathetic partner. “These companies are in a ‘catch-22’”, he says. “Great companies with great products and proven management teams are being left hanging to struggle on with limited resources while investors sit on a perch waiting for the ‘blood in the water’ feeding frenzy.”

It’s enough to leave even a seasoned dealmaker shaking his head.

Race to manufacturing prominence intensifies throughout western U.S.

Late last month the Obama administration and U.S. Department of Commerce were busy awarding economic development grants throughout the nation including Colorado. The Office of Economic Development and International Trade was the recipient of a $200,000 grant to “…develop an implementation plan needed to establish an Advanced Industries Manufacturing Institute that will support business development and foster economic growth in the state.”

According to the official release, OEDIT “…has targeted seven key industries for this effort: advanced manufacturing, aerospace, bioscience, electronics, energy, infrastructure engineering and technology. The implementation plan will ultimately help establish an Advanced Industries Manufacturing Institute to drive growth in these sectors.” It’s been reported this new entity will focus on job training and workforce issues.

We’ll hear from OEDIT next week, but it’s very interesting to learn how other states view their manufacturing-sector challenges through the programs that also received grants and investments last month. The Colorado announcement was followed by news of a first round of awards from the Obama administration’s “Investing in Manufacturing Communities Partnership” program.

Among the $7 million dollars in grants and investments to entities in our region:

· $200,000 to Wichita State University to develop a comprehensive economic development strategy to identify, verify, refine, and prioritize key tactical manufacturing ecosystem investments and strategically align resources to support the region’s advanced manufacturing sector.

· $200,000 to the University of Utah in Salt Lake City, Utah to build a cluster-based development strategy to bring innovation, growth, and sustainability to the state’s advanced composites industry cluster through increased access to capital, research, global markets, and an enhanced innovation ecosystem.

· $200,000 to the Butte Local Development Corporation of Butte, Montana to establish the Montana Center of Manufacturing Technology at the Mike Mansfield Advanced Technology Center. The Center will leverage existing assets and facilitate collaboration between private and public entities to provide long-term economic and job growth solutions.


· $200,000 to the Campus Research Corporation of Tucson, Arizona to support the Border Technology Manufacturing Initiative, a regional planning group consisting of industry, workforce development, local government, and academia that will identify existing strengths and gaps in a 13-county region that spans the US/Mexico border from Yuma, Arizona to Las Cruces, New Mexico. 


· $200,000 to the Coachella Valley Economic Partnership of Palm Springs, California to develop an implementation-ready strategy to enhance the region’s capacity to attract and expand private investment in the manufacturing sector and increase international trade and exports.

· $140,000 to Yuma County, Arizona to develop a manufacturing strategy for Yuma County to help increase higher-skilled, higher-wage jobs by capitalizing on the county’s location along the U.S. – Mexico border.

· $171,864 to the Greater Phoenix Economic Council of Phoenix, Arizona to develop strategies to implement the Innovation and Commercialization Center for Advanced Manufacturing (ICCAM), a non-profit public-private partnership that will focus on helping the region grow its advanced manufacturing sector while preparing workers for related jobs.

· $178,750 to California State University at Fresno in Fresno, California to support the San Joaquin Valley Agricultural Manufacturing Investment Strategy and Sustainability Plan, which will move the region further toward value-added agriculture and help create and grow food manufacturing companies in the region.

· $135,000 to the Mid-Columbia Economic Development District of The Dalles, Oregon, to develop a strategic implementation plan in support of manufacturing businesses in the five-county bi-state Mid-Columbia region of Oregon and Washington.

· $100,000 to China Lake Technologies, LLC of Ridgecrest, California to develop a strategy to create new jobs in the region in the emerging bio-products industry. The strategy will work to build upon the region’s strong aviation, space and military presence, as well as their strength in agriculture.

Manufacturing’s clearly not an afterthought in the regional economic competition.

Paths cross in the Pacific: Japan beckons Springs Fab, sustains Sushi Den

On paper, they couldn’t be more disparate companies. Springs Fabrication, in Colorado Springs, is a global manufacturer of steel containers and fabricated metal products. Sushi Den is Denver’s iconic Japanese restaurant, making food-art from the most pristine of raw materials – fish.

Both are profiled in this issue of CompanyWeek, surprising to some maybe, but for me a great example of how making and manufacturing span a fascinating cross-section of industry segments.

For a moment in 2011 their paths crossed, the way they often do for companies with global operations and long supply-chains. But the circumstances were unique.

Unknown to many, Springs Fab was thrust into the middle of the earthquake crisis in Japan two years ago, when the company was hired to design and manufacture huge steel containers to capture the radioactive water used to cool the nuclear fire in the reactor at Fukushima.

I’d just watched a Frontline documentary on the Fukushima disaster and was surprised by how close Japan came to a cataclysm that might have surpassed Chernobyl. The accidents were similar: at Fukushima, an explosion tore apart the reactor and left the core fully exposed, emitting lethal amounts of radiation and in danger of secondary explosions that might have poisoned large swaths of the Japanese mainland. Much like Chernobyl, the bravery of pilots and firefighters able to get water onto the fire prevented catastrophe.

I knew that Springs Fab had built the steel vessels used to hold and filter the water pumped out of the reactor. They’d been flown on huge Russian-made Antonov transport planes to Japan. I hoped Tom Neppl, Spring Fab’s CEO, would tell me the story. (Mike Dano also writes about it here.) He did.

“I was sitting in my office on a Saturday, following up on some bids, when a partner of ours called, explained what was going on, and asked if we’d get into the project”, Neppl recounted. “We were actually in a bit of a lull, but had experience with radioactive materials. We assessed the risk, decided it was worth it and jumped in.”

Neppl’s an unassuming guy and downplays what unfolded, but the decision placed Springs Fab squarely into an international drama, involving TEPCO, the Tokyo Electric Power Company that managed Fukushima, the Japanese government, and among others French nuclear officials who viewed Springs Fab as interlopers. For weeks, TEPCO officials were onsite at Springs Fab’s facility, meticulously following progress.

As it became clear Neppl’s company was emerging as the go-to supplier, a senior Japanese government official landed in his office to deliver an urgent request.

“Dr. Suzuki brought me a gift, sat in the chair you’re sitting, and asked if we could reduce our production schedule from three or four weeks to one. How can you say no? I got a yellow-pad out and we redesigned the schedule right there. We met the deadline.”

He won’t take credit but what happened is now part of the historical record: Springs Fab became one of the project’s most innovative and reliable firms. The steel modules, containers and systems designed and manufactured in Colorado Springs were among the most trusted by Japanese energy and government officials where the degree of difficulty took its toll on other solutions.

Fukushima continues to be a difficult proposition for officials. Last week we read of more leaks from the site.

But Neppl’s containers captured water that would otherwise have run off into the surrounding terrain – and oceans.

Japan’s a key cog in Sushi Den’s supply chain, but the restaurant wasn’t impacted by the accident. The Kizaki brothers source their fish “…where they grew up”, in southern Japan opposite the northeastern location of Fukushima (read Jeff Rundles profile). It’s also not clear what impact the accident did, or will, have.

But thirty percent of the thousands of pounds of fish Sushi Den flies into Denver every week is from Japan. No doubt they care deeply about the entire fishery. At least for a brief moment in 2011, the efforts of one Colorado company meant a lot to another, in operations underway thousands of miles away.

Improbable. Fascinating. Important. Now you know.

Lifestyle Manufacturing: Has the time come for a new Colorado ‘Key Industry’?

Among the reasons I launched CompanyWeek was to showcase Colorado companies making and manufacturing products aligned with sports, recreation, and the lifestyle ethos unique to this region. All three companies profiled this week qualify; each are at a different place along the growth continuum.

The Fat Bike Company has received a lot of press lately because of explosive growth, but also because we’re on our way to becoming an epicenter for cycling-related manufacturing. The Fat-sters in Colorado Springs are only the latest example.

Zum XR’s still under the radar, but Bob Niichel’s technology-drink (my term) is already getting rave reviews. That Whole Foods, among others, sells the product speaks volumes.

Newton Running may be the poster-child, though, for the need to evaluate anew how Colorado organizes its economic development effort to support and leverage the innovation and making that’s underway here in the lifestyle space. Read the profile here, but suffice to say that Jerry Lee and the other founders of Newton have developed a global brand in Boulder, well known in their sector if not their home state.

They don’t manufacturer here, but very few in his space do, including iconic brands like Nike. Lee’s commitment to on-shore shoe making is sincere though; he’d hoped to launch Newton as an American-made product. Colorado still may not be his next manufacturing destination, such is the depth of the challenge to manufacture any apparel in the U.S. (also read our Janska and Loki profiles.) Somewhere in North America, out-of-Asia, would be progress, according to Lee.

But his brand, and success, and the growing ‘lifestyle manufacturing’ sector here beg the question: why not here? Or, why not begin to aggressively promote the state for its burgeoning ‘Lifestyle Manufacturing’ sector regardless of where some its products must be made – even as they’re designed or assembled or conceived here?

OEDIT, Colorado’s Office of Economic Development and International Trade, identifies 14 Key Industry sectors. It’s unclear to me where businesses like Newton or Fat Bike, Janska or Moots, KOTA or Big Agnes, reside in Colorado’s current nomenclature. In Advanced Manufacturing? Sure, some more than others, though this category is intended to highlight the state’s high-tech industrial assets. (Of which there are many). In Tourism and Outdoor Recreation? Not really: it’s a service sector, primarily, and consumers don’t come to Colorado to buy Newton running shoes.

Are innovators and entrepreneurs in lifestyle manufacturing part of Creative Industries? Of course. It’s an amazing sector that supports “nonprofit cultural organizations and government agencies”, primarily, “that produce and present arts and cultural activities”. But it’s not intended to be a catch-all that includes manufacturers.

Where then? The stakes are huge. Imagine a concerted effort including industry, economic development, higher-ed, and business like the sporting brands that make a killing off Colorado’s assets, in a push to position Colorado as the West’s — the nation’s — premier lifestyle manufacturing business destination.

Something Independent (S|I) has been storytelling in support of lifestyle companies here for years. They’ll again convene business to recognize the latest of a growing crop of Colorado companies next week at the third-annual Wright Awards. I asked Chuck Sullivan, one of S|I’s founders, whether the state could become an apparel manufacturing ‘hub’.

“At S|I we talk a lot about the intersection of lifestyle and commerce”, he says. “Colorado sits squarely at the hub of this convergence. It’s an attractive place to be. Whether it’s an apparel company, a ski or snowboard maker, a craft brewer or distiller, it’s first a state of mind. Pursuing the business that you love in the place you want to be.”

He gets warmed-up. “Then it grows to point where it’s the place you HAVE to be. And I think you are seeing that here in Colorado. There are quite a few apparel companies in Colorado — SmartWool in Steamboat Springs, Spyder in Boulder, and smaller ones like Shredly in Aspen and Jiberish in Denver. Flylow. Loki. And Pearl Izumi and Pactimo in cycling circles. It’s a good place to be”.

Ah, craft brewers. You’ll find the industry represented in Food & Agriculture, under the cow, which for the nation’s leading craft-brew exporter, may be under-selling Colorado beer. Not to mention our killer beef and ag manufacturing assets.

Beer’s a critical lifestyle component for me. A new industry alignment may do us both some good.

Colorado’s jobs paradox – high unemployment but a lack of skilled labor – bedevils manufacturers.

You’ve seen the numbers: Colorado’s unemployment remains high by recent standards, roughly 7%, with about 40,000 fewer people employed today than in March 2008, when employment peaked at 2,611,357. Certainly the job picture’s improved from the dreadful period culminating October 2010 when the unemployment rate hit 9.1%, but today’s number remains stubbornly high, inching up again only recently:

(Department of Numbers data)


One might reasonable guess that today, employers benefit from a deep labor pool with plenty of qualified workers to choose from. And while this may be the case in certain industry sectors, manufacturers here are challenged to find qualified employees.

This manufacturing ‘skills-gap’ has become a common theme in the business profiles we’ve published in only four issues of CompanyWeek. When asked about his challenges, Taylor Merritt, CFO at Merritt Equipment Co. in Henderson, was unequivocal. “Skilled workforce is the first thing that comes to mind. Manufacturing has a horrible image. People think it’s dirty, it’s hard work, and there’s no potential for a career.”

Jeff Popiel, CEO at Geotech Environment Equipment echoed the sentiment. “Hiring people with the right skill set and mindset that see manufacturing as a career…is a challenge.” In this week’s issue, Bill Sails of EarthRoamer adds, “One of our biggest challenges is finding skilled, good employees…”.

No manufacturing sector may be as challenged on the labor front as the apparel business, where for many re-shoring jobs remains only a worthy idea, despite the efforts of some Colorado manufacturers, like Janksa in Colorado Springs. “It is challenging to compete on price with companies that manufacture offshore,” says Jan Erickson, CEO and founder. “Instead of pennies per hour, we are paying a modest, but livable wage. We have not, however, been able to offer the benefits that I believe our skilled sewers need and deserve.”

For Erickson and others in the apparel trade, the challenge amounts to no less than rebuilding a viable workforce. “When everything went offshore in the ’80s and ’90s, a lot of those sewers went to other kinds of jobs. So far we’ve done fine, but I think a lot of those skilled workers are gone who were here 20 years ago.”

So where to go from here? At the behest of industry and with the support of Colorado’s occupational educators, especially, this past spring lawmakers passed legislation designed to better align curriculum with the needs of industry. As described in today’s issue of CompanyWeek by Ben Nesbitt, Program Director with the Colorado Community College System, HB13-1165 authorized the creation of a “Manufacturing Career Pathway…designed to provide efficient and economical on ramps for individuals interested in pursuing careers in the manufacturing sector.” It’s a promising development, even if tangible benefits of HB-1165 remain a ways off.

Of course tomorrow’s classrooms must be filled with students compelled to pursue careers in manufacturing. For this to happen, the manufacturing ‘brand’ must evolve to better reflect the progressive bent of people and companies driving its growth here, in Colorado. As Geotech’s Jeff Popiel notes, “This is where the state and the city are coming in, trying to rebrand manufacturing.”

I agree there’s high awareness. Denver’s Office of Economic Development, in particular, is intent on ‘messaging’ around manufacturing – and for good reason. The city’s identified the sector as key to its growth strategy, understanding that employers would benefit from a growing, MFG-inclined urban workforce.

But industry can’t – and shouldn’t – rely on government efforts alone. The challenge now is to ensure that effort and influence trickle down from those at the top of the manufacturing food-chain to small business who lack resources and need help to retool today’s workforce. Is Big-Manufacturing engaged? More on that later.

Made in America: Will a MFG revival transform the Rocky Mountain economy?

Meet CompanyWeek, The Voice of Rocky Mountain Manufacturing & Commerce. It’s the culmination of a lot of things, really: ideas and experience, of a perceived opportunity, of a desire to build something, of talented colleagues who can help make it happen.

CompanyWeek’s also about two recurring themes for me in my last few years at ColoradoBiz.

First, I’ve been increasingly drawn to companies here that make stuff – manufacturers. In Colorado you don’t have to look far to find the fruits of their labor. Beer, satellites, IPhone cases, batteries, software, bikes, apparel, fish tanks, organic salsa, shoes – and on. From start-up to billion-dollar company. Plus, they’re nearly always interesting, the cool factor can be off the charts and the personalities are often as compelling as the products. It’s also a growth-sector.

But I’d argue that manufacturing’s at the center of profound change in the economy, and that Colorado will be a case-study in how a region will leverage new manufacturing to great gain, or miss-out to communities that harness the favorable winds pushing along goods-producing businesses.

What manufacturing lacks here, is scale. In Colorado’s service-heavy economy, it accounts for about 8% of Colorado’s employment base and GDP (compared to about 12% nationally). Service business like finance, education and health, and professional services are several times larger, as is government, Colorado’s largest service employer. Three-times as many people work in government than in manufacturing, nearly 400,000 employees

The number’s a bit startling, honesty, and for me an incentive. It seems self-evident that more goods-producing companies are needed. The clearest path for me was the idea of launching a publication that brings this new manufacturing sector to life. Today, business media bends decidedly toward service.

Media’s at its best when it’s at the center of a growing, evolving community. And in this case, there’s also a clear need. In a CompanyWeek interview, when asked how Colorado might help its manufacturers, Rob Mitchell, CEO of Moots Cycling in Steamboat, explained.

“More storytelling is one,” he suggests. “There are some really interesting stories in the state of companies that are very, very well-respected brands, known on a worldwide basis, that are building 100 percent, or very nearly 100 percent of everything they make and sell right here in our back yards. I think a program that highlights those and brings visibility to them and to the state at the same time could be very powerful.”

In focusing on goods-producing companies, service businesses may benefit most. They’re key to manufacturing success and in need, I’d argue, of a new generation of companies to drive growth in their business.

Initially, I hope you’ll ride along by signing up for a free subscription. CompanyWeek will sent to your inbox weekly beginning September 4, with content linked to www.companyweek.com. More later – in every issue of CompanyWeek.

Contact me at btaylor@companyweek.com, or 303-888-2832

MFG jobs build wealth. They may also drive wages higher and ease the growing income gap.

Is a job a job?

Statistics like the unemployment rate suggest it is, but of course they’re not. Pay is the most obvious differentiator. I’m no economist but it’s also easy to make the case MFG jobs, jobs that produce goods and services, are fundamentally different and critical to a sustained, boom-and-bust-proof economy we seek in our region.

MFG jobs are ‘primary’ jobs; they create wealth here as money and capital flow back to the region from sale of manufactured products – and through the ‘indirect’ jobs they create in retail, supplies, professional services, etc.

They may also be an important catalyst to reversing a decades-long trend that continues to be a drag on the economy. Against the backdrop of growing wage inequality, enough new MFG jobs – a higher percentage of total employment – could drive average wages up.

2011 Annual Wages by Sector Colorado

Management of Companies and Enterprises $130,515
Mining 104,898
Utilities 88,322
Information 84,138
Finance and Insurance 74,312
Wholesale trade 71,428
Manufacturing 61,668
Construction 48,865
Government 48,082
Health Care and Social Assistance 44,852
Real Estate Rental and Leasing 43,918
Transportation and Warehousing 43,761
Education Services 37,978
Administrative and Waste Services 37,704
Arts, Entertainment and Recreation 30,734
Retail Trade 27,113
Accommodation and Food Services 18,042
All Industries 49,043
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Census of Employment and wages

Can average wages grow significantly without new primary jobs in the mix? Of course. And many Colorado manufacturers don’t need higher-skilled manufacturing labor that seems short in supply.

But Colorado business has carved out significant leads in growing MFG sectors. The region is poised to build on the successes of what are now internationally known brands. Demand for manufacturing labor seems to be increasing. Employers I know can’t find enough qualified labor. Wages in MFG should rise as a result.

Not all is rosy on the wage front. As the Wall St. Journal reported last year manufacturing wages haven’t kept pace with inflation, or with rapidly rising productivity gains. Yet this in turn has made the United States more competitive on the international manufacturing stage, as wages in China and elsewhere are rising.

The opportunity means little if communities won’t develop and support MFG businesses and train a new qualified workforce equal to the advanced technical requirements of today’s maker companies. ‘Making Colorado’, Gov. Hickenlooper’s rebranding effort for the state, is a good start. But the marketing emphasis on ‘making’ is oddly misaligned with the Office of Economic Development and International Trade’s industry sector breakdown, where ‘Advanced Manufacturing’ is a catch-all for all manufacturing in the state. Or not. Frankly I’m not sure.

But if we’re successful developing a new generation of ‘primary’ employers, we’ll build more wealth and begin to reverse a widening income inequality gap, an economic headwind to be sure.

More on jobs and training in this issue – and next week.

China’s investment revolution

What if you started a revolution and no one came?

Wang Wei, arguably China’s most influential businessman of the past decade, may have contemplated the question eight years ago when he launched China’s first mergers and acquisitions association. Years of service had earned him a comfortable path to retirement as a senior and well-respected governmental official, if he chose. But a more risky journey beckoned.

His choice transformed this nation’s economy. Wang’s investment revolution blossomed. We met Wang Wei at the office in Beijing.

Private-sector M&A didn’t exist in China before Wang’s efforts. Even the term wasn’t part of China’s business lexicon. Today, membership in the China Association of Private Equity, the China M&A Association and The China M&A Group numbers in the thousands, including U.S. heavyweights who support the sector like Pricewaterhouse. This new investment community is fueling China’s extraordinary private-sector growth.

[Three years ago, at one of the many investment conferences that now dot the Chinese business landscape, it was suggested that Wei launch a magazine in support of the sector. The China Dealmaker is now a must-read for investors and the nation’s business elite. Last Thursday we signed an agreement to provide content to China Dealmaker about U.S. cleantech and new energy sectors.]

The associations have in effect provided the structure to encourage investment dollars by facilitating connections, providing research and lobbying public-sector entities. Wang’s M&A group has been a catalyst for growth and investment – 90 percent of which backs private enterprise. The resulting explosion of entrepreneurship in China’s private-sector middle-market has changed the economic landscape here.

How significant has the change been? Consider China businessman Chen Dan’s brand development and design firm, Bang. In addition to becoming the go-to firm for some of China’s largest companies like China Telecom and Bank of China, Bang has developed a low-cost design alternative for China’s expanding small and medium-size business market, www.toidea.com. Demand is off the charts.

Over three short years, Bang’s ToIdea.com has churned out over 700,000 design projects, from over 130,000 designers registered on the site, for 20,000-plus businesses from across China. Businesses submit a project, Bang set’s a price, and designers respond with ideas. Check it out; there’s a real-time counter. If brand and project design is one measure of business activity, then www.toidea.com is chronicling the growth in China’s private sector.

____________________________

And on another note…

It’s impossible to visit China without commenting on the food. Thanks to our partner in this endeavor and host on the trip, Jeff Wang of Colorado-based Poetica, LLC, our culinary sojourn in Beijing has been off-the-charts great. I’ve also tried my best to emulate the Travel Channel’s Bizarre Food series. Among the “unique” fare I’ve sampled: a duck’s blood soup, boiled chicken’s feet, deep-fried scorpion-on-a-stick, tender goat and donkey (sorry; fare of a former emperor, I’m told), spicy duck’s feet, and a couple other things I’m not at liberty to disclose but wouldn’t have tried if I’d known the source.

Like a little heat, like me? Beijing’s your place.