Manufacturing is turning the corner on its workforce challenge, with technology as the catalyst

Jon Emont’s Wall Street Journal story, “How Singapore Got Its Manufacturing Mojo Back,” is required reading for city and state planners intent on developing more local manufacturing. If we read closely, Singapore’s experience is a road map for how manufacturing will likely develop in communities across America — and the news is good.

Emont first notes that Singapore’s manufacturing employment has declined as a percentage of the whole. For those who follow manufacturing, it’s a symphony of numbers we’re all familiar with. “The manufacturing sector’s share of Singapore’s employment declined to 12.3 percent last year from 15.5 percent in 2013,” Emont writes. “The number of manufacturing workers has shrunk for eight years straight.”

More: “The city-state had faced industrial decline, with World Bank figures showing manufacturing falling to 18 percent of gross domestic product in 2013, from 27 percent in 2005.”

Then manufacturing made a comeback, Emont says, “rising to 21 percent of GDP in 2020, according to the World Bank’s latest figures. Singapore government data shows manufacturing made up 22 percent of its GDP in 2021.”

The most telling number is how Singapore’s new manufacturing economy has fundamentally changed, to where today, “the share of manufacturing jobs held by resident workers classified as high-skill — professionals, managers, executives, and technicians — has risen by 8 percentage points to 74 percent last year.”

This is a huge number. As Emont concludes, “Manufacturing is becoming a white-collar profession in Singapore.”

One barrier to a full-on manufacturing comeback in the U.S. has been the perception of a dumb and dirty sector. If the global trend is similar, and we know it is, then American communities, many who flash significant assets fueled by R&D and technology, are poised to play host to more manufacturing.

On one hand, it’s counterintuitive: We equate tech economies with everything but manufacturing. But what’s evident is that technology will be the catalyst for more advanced manufacturing — and more jobs.

To be sure, America’s manufacturing workforce hasn’t reached “white collar” status; and it’s unclear what an ideal mix looks like in the U.S., home to an infinitely more complex and diverse economy. Yet Jim Watson, CEO of California Manufacturing Technology Consulting, told me earlier this year that “36.9 percent of manufacturing employment is in high technology” in the Golden State. (Watson has since revised that number up.) It may not be a precise equivalent, and we lag considerably behind advanced manufacturing outposts like Singapore. But the gist is the same: Manufacturing’s future workforce is trending high-tech. California, for one, will benefit.

Yes, companies must get on the automation bandwagon. Investments in new equipment and processes are the cost of entry to compete for employees. And as always, it’s our collective responsibility to upskill American labor. We owe it to manufacturing’s workforce.

But for communities intent on building a more robust and diverse manufacturing sector, today the intersection between high-tech jobs and growth in manufacturing bodes well. It’s no longer a stark choice: high-tech or low-skilled manufacturing jobs — but not both.

Tomorrow, advanced economies will be manufacturing economies.

Bart Taylor is publisher of CompanyWeek. Email him at btaylor@companyweek.com.

U.S. manufacturing at a crossroads — again

And suddenly, it’s gone.

After a feel-good decade when the prospects of a sustained American manufacturing renewal seemed tantalizingly close, the news this month of soaring U.S. trade deficits and declining manufacturing output and GDP is sobering.

David Goldman summed up the wreckage last week.

“U.S. real gross domestic product (GDP) shrank at a 1.5% annual rate during the first quarter, more than the preliminary estimate of -1.3%, the Commerce Department reported on May 26. The worst trade performance on record took 3.2% off GDP, more than accounting for the entire drop. Nothing like this has happened before.”

America’s trade deficit in goods spiked to $128 billion in March, or an annual rate of $1.54 trillion, while U.S. manufacturers’ sales plunged after adjustment for inflation. In real terms, U.S. factory sales have fallen by nearly 10% since 2018, and by nearly 20% since 2007.

Consumers spent the lion’s share of the $6 trillion Covid stimulus on imports. That’s another first: U.S. manufacturing never contracted in the past following a big increase in demand.”

At the same time, Goldman notes that, “The biggest increase in U.S. imports came from China, which shipped 55% more to the United States in April 2022 (in seasonally-adjusted dollar terms) than it did in August 2019, when then-president Trump slapped 25% tariffs on most Chinese imports.”

Tariffs are intact. So much for the notion that tariffs slow down imports.

Yet tariffs alone were never going to compel companies to move production onshore without a strategy to also increase domestic manufacturing options. As much as supply-chain disruptions are forcing U.S. companies to rethink where to make products, without stateside options, many will fall back on offshore supply chains.

If that doesn’t change, then the positive news released earlier this month by Harry Moser’s Reshoring Initiative may be all for naught. Moser tracks the stated intentions of companies to reshore manufacturing jobs or invest in U.S. factories (FDI, or Foreign Direct Investment), and the trend continues to be positive.

Moser reported last week that in 2021, “[T]he private and federal push for domestic supply of essential goods propelled reshoring and foreign direct investment (FDI) job announcements to a record 261,000,” adding, “[T]he number of companies reporting reshoring and FDI set a new record of over 1,800 companies.”

More than that, with “5 million manufacturing jobs still offshore, as measured by our $1.1 trillion/year goods trade deficit,” there’s room for more growth in the U.S. sector.

If, of course, we’re successful nurturing a more capable manufacturing ecosystem. Moser isn’t as sanguine as his data suggests: “We see the administration applying tourniquets rather than addressing the underlying issue of U.S. manufacturing cost being uncompetitive.”

Yet we’ve had bad news before, and as Moser also tells me, “There’s a lag from reshoring announcements until production, sometimes years for the megafactories,” meaning the 2021 announcements aren’t manifest on the ground, yet. We need to ensure these companies can follow through on their stated plans.

Here then, is our crossroads. Moser would reverse what he calls America’s “deindustrialization” policy. “If you want to destroy your manufacturing, you’d do what we do,” he says. “Every poor country you want to help, you’d give them favored-nation status to import products to the U.S. with lower duties than they give us; you’d spend billions protecting the rest of the world from pirates and terrorism; you’d allow your universities to flourish in liberal arts and your skilled workforce to decline; and you wouldn’t have a value-added tax to protect your key industries. If you want manufacturing to disappear, that’s what you’d do. And we’ve done that,” he told me last June. It’s worth reiterating.

We’d also focus the national discussion around improving U.S. supply chains on specific action, to the refitting of U.S. suppliers and transparent mapping of supplier networks, across multiple industries, so that buyers can find expertise stateside where it exists.

As Goldman concludes, “China’s strong supply chains and robust manufacturing ecosystem attracted more foreign investment than ever from US companies such as Tesla, accelerating the shift out of onshore manufacturing.”

We’ll revisit what’s happening to reengineer the U.S. supply chain next time, as we push to enable more U.S. companies to manufacture closer to home. Our economy depends on it.

Bart Taylor is publisher of CompanyWeek. Reach him at btaylor@companyweek.com.

City Plating and Metal Finishing