To turn the corner on manufacturing, California leaders are first acknowledging the pain

The Golden State’s most dependable manufacturing truth teller may be the trade group charged with its health and efficacy — the California Manufacturers and Technology Association, or CMTA.

CMTA released data earlier this month that points to more pain than pluses. They deserve credit for doing so.

Manufacturing is measured in multiple ways. Today, more manufacturing companies call California home than any state. But as reports cited by CMTA tell us, California now lags way behind America’s leading manufacturing outposts in private-sector investments and job growth across manufacturing’s varied sectors; at the same time, it tops the list in undesirable categories like energy costs, insurance premiums for workers comp, and corporate tax rates. See the correlation?

How far behind is debatable, but the trends are unmistakable. According to Site Selection magazine’s Conway Projects Database, states like Texas and Ohio are adding “corporate facility projects with significant impact, including headquarters, manufacturing plants, R&D operations, and logistics” at a rate that leaves California in the dust. In 2020, Texas added 781 private-sector corporate projects that exceeded $1 million, added 20 jobs, or involved 20,000 square feet of new floor area. California added 103, behind such manufacturing stalwarts Louisiana (116) and South Carolina (110). The per-capita ranking — projects per million residents — are even worse. (Arizona led the rest of the West with 108. Colorado (29) and Utah (21) lagged further.)

The trends aren’t a surprise to those in a position to fight back on behalf of California manufacturing. CMTA president Lance Hastings and other advocates like Jim Watson of the CMTC, California’s NIST-sponsored Manufacturing Extension Partner, helped craft a comprehensive road map for the sector in 2019. The California Forward Advanced Manufacturing recommendations outline a “statewide manufacturing ecosystem strategy” along four primary axes: strategy, workforce, infrastructure, and trade.

Its proscriptions are detailed and touch on many of the high points in today’s national narrative, like “taking action to upskill our workforce, rebuild our infrastructure, fight for free trade, and promote sustainability.” It also calls for the creation of a new manufacturing bureaucracy, a network of new departments, councils, institutes, and committees. The tactics seem well reasoned. But there’s so much. It can be a head-spinning roadmap.

I can envision company executives asking simply for lower business costs, targeted tariffs and value-added taxes that level the playing field for U.S. companies, more suppliers and better tools to find them, and marketing air cover to encourage consumers and OEMs to buy local, to support local manufacturers.

If California leaders don’t want to emulate Texas, perhaps China’s approach is worth watching. Miao Wei, a retiring minister of industry and trade, made news earlier this year by stating that the global manufacturing leader is in fact “30 years away from becoming a manufacturing ‘great power.'”

It’s a bit of an overstatement.

But his language reflects the importance of manufacturing in the world’s second-largest economy: “Basic capabilities are still weak, core technologies are in the hands of others, and the risk of ‘being hit in the throat’ has significantly increased,” he said, and concludes: “We must maintain our strategic resolve, stay clear-headed, and deeply understand the gaps and deficiencies.”

China leaves little doubt of its intentions to be the global manufacturing superpower. California — and other Western states that ranked poorly — will hopefully redouble efforts to deliver on the recommendations in the California Forward plan, to advance manufacturing.

A renewed sense of urgency would be welcome. So much is at stake.

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

A boycott of the Beijing Olympics would be preposterous. Ask the brands that manufacture there

In American politics, China is the equal-opportunity villain. All sides have found reasons to pick a fight, including the media, where voices are drumming up support for a boycott of China’s 2022 Beijing Olympic Games.

But an Olympic boycott is the worst of all options to protest China’s behavior or effect lasting change.

For starters, history tells us they don’t work. What was gained from the Carter administration’s boycott of the 1980 Moscow Olympics? Certainly not a USSR withdrawal from Afghanistan. Wider economic embargoes are typically no better. What of the 60-plus year Cuban embargo? If the intention was to sustain the Castro regime for half a century, mission accomplished.

Yet even a symbolic boycott of the Beijing games would ignore our current codependency with China and make for an embarrassing spectacle. Last week’s galling Washington Post op-ed, “Companies must boycott the Beijing Olympics,” aptly demonstrates why.

The Post lectures long-running Olympic sponsors like Visa, Coca-Cola, and General Electric that “[t]heir endorsement of the Games is effectively an endorsement of China as a global leader, entitled to a worldwide celebration of its achievements and worth.”

What, then, of the myriad American brands whose products are made in China, brands that will festoon U.S. Olympians as they parade in opening ceremonies, compete in the Games, or socialize in Beijing? Are they to boycott the games as well? What message would this send to the Chinese factory workers who manufacture their gear? (Here’s the latest on how Ralph Lauren is trying to thread the needle with the “official” U.S. uniforms to be worn in opening and closing ceremonies for the Tokyo games. U.S. outdoor industry brands must be rolling their eyes.)

The degree to which U.S. companies rely on Chinese labor is staggering. Denver’s VF Corp. — parent company to stellar consumer brands like The North Face, Timberland, Vans, and many more — owns or operates over 400 factories in China alone. They’re in good company. U.S. firms operating offshore “effectively endorse” China as a global manufacturing leader every day.

The codependency runs deep. U.S. brands rely on Chinese employees to fulfill the brand promises they make to customers here and around the world. Kühl, Utah’s successful OI brand, proudly proclaims its products are “Born in the Mountains” — the Wasatch Mountains, one suspects. They’re also made in China.

But to single out Kühl or any of hundreds of U.S. brands, is no more appropriate than berating Visa or GE. When U.S. brands have more options to invest in domestic labor and factories, but don’t, The Washington Post will have front page news. Better than today when its columnists parrot the op-ed board to implore companies to ask, “[is] it really consistent with our values to sponsor the Genocide ­Olympics?” even as Chinese labor helps U.S. companies bring American “values” to life every day in the products they make.

An informed approach by U.S. policymakers would encourage American athletes to travel to China and win, as they work overtime to help U.S. companies reshore jobs and fulfill the brand promises they make every day.

No, an Olympic boycott will do nothing to deter China from subjugating its Uyghur population. To effect lasting change, to regain leverage, America must reestablish the domestic supply chains that enable its companies to manufacture more products on American soil. As we’ve written before, a reinvigorated U.S. manufacturing base is the one development certain to capture Beijing’s attention.

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

Handicapping the Colorado Manufacturing Awards: Here’s the list of finalists

Finalists were announced last week in the 6th annual Colorado Manufacturing Awards. It’s our own March Madness, and the brackets are incredible.

More than 100 companies submitted nominations to the 2021 program, roughly 90 percent of all submissions. Nearly twice as many women were nominated for Colorado Manufacturing Woman of the Year than last year. Finalists earned their way here.

I participate in a selection committee that picks finalists, but I don’t judge or select CMA winners. I do have a front row seat to the proceedings. Here’s my “inside look” at the brackets.

Industrial Group

Industrial/Equipment Manufacturer of the Year

Twin Monkeys Beverage Systems | Aurora

StoneAge | Durango

Sundyne | Arvada

Aerospace Manufacturer of the Year

Redwire Space | Longmont/Littleton

MBK Machine | Longmont

Special Aerospace Services | Boulder/Arvada

Building/Construction Manufacturer of the Year

ROXBOX Containers | Denver

Colorado Timberframe | Lafayette

Encore Electric | Littleton

Bioscience Manufacturer of the Year

Birko Corporation | Henderson

Leiters | Englewood

Hirsh Precision | Boulder

Energy/Transportation Manufacturer of the Year

Keystone Tower Systems | Denver

Rubadue Wire Company | Loveland

Oribi Manufacturing | Commerce City

Industrial/Equipment Manufacturer of the Year may be the CMA’s toughest bracket. Twin Monkeys has fueled Colorado’s nationally renowned beer and beverage industries. StoneAge, in Durango, may be less known to Front Rangers, but read our profile and you’ll understand why they’re a powerhouse. Sundyne? Only one of the country’s top industrial pump and compressor manufacturers, from the maker mecca of Arvada. No joke. Your guess is as good as mine.

Bioscience Manufacturer of the Year presents an intriguing showdown between two stalwart OEMs and one of Colorado’s brilliant contract manufacturers. A celebration of a powerful Colorado industry supply chain.

Building/Construction and Energy/Transportation Manufacturers of the Year are fascinating brackets, a mix of successful companies, up-and-comers vs. established brands. Oribi is a rising player in composites. Watch out.

Aerospace Manufacturer of the Year is predictably strong. Redwire Space, newly formed this year to acquire space-related companies in an innovative new cluster model, including several established companies in Colorado, flashes serious bona fides with components recently landing on Mars. But Special Aerospace Services, including SAS Flight Factory, is a special company and CMA Alumni. Contract ace MBK Machine rounds out a great bracket

Consumer Group

Consumer Brand of the Year

Phunkshun Wear | Denver

FlyLow Gear | Denver

Moots | Steamboat Springs

Food Brand/Co-packer of the Year

Motherlode Co-Packing | Hudson

Root Shoot Malting/Olander Farms | Loveland

Keen One Foods | Boulder

Colorado Winery of the Year

Sauvage Spectrum | Palisade

Carlson Vineyards | Palisade

The Storm Cellar | Hotchkiss

Outstanding Craft Distiller

Storm King Distilling Co. | Montrose

Black Bear Distillery | Green Mountain Falls

Mystic Mountain Distillery | Castle Rock

Outstanding Craft Brewer

City Star Brewing | Berthoud

Denver Beer Co. | Denver

Holidaily Brewing Company | Golden

Cannabis Manufacturer of the Year

NuVue Pharma | Pueblo

Stratos | Pueblo

Medically Correct | Denver

Outdoor industry OEMs and brands have dominated the Consumer Brand of the Year category and this year is no different. Dan Abrams’ high-flying apparel brand, FlyLow Gear, squares off against two OEMs that manufacture in-state. Cycle manufacturer Moots is celebrating its 40th anniversary this year in Steamboat Springs. Substance and sizzle. Moots would be a #1 seed in the NCAA Tournament this year. FlyLow and Phunkshun Wear, a CMA winner in 2018 and three-time finalist, may need a buzzer beater.

Brands and co-packers don’t always meet in the finals in Food Brand/Co-Packer of the Year. In some years, finalists are one or the other. But it’s great when they do. At the epicenter of America’s natural and organic food ecosystem, each shapes the sector in profound ways. Motherlode and Keen One Foods are worthy representatives. Throw in malt maven Root Shoot Malting, and this bracket is tough to call.

Outstanding Craft Distiller finalists are on their way up. No surprise — the story of this young industry, with young players, is about the future, along with the whiskey aging in its barrels. Montrose’s Storm King Distilling Co. was a finalist last year. It may be enough to call them a favorite.

An annual CMA highlight is Outstanding Craft Brewer. The winners list is a who’s who roster, and the group competition has settled into an industry-defining exercise: Finalists are often a mix of established early-mover, middle-market success story, and industry innovator. No different this year. Three great companies, as much as brands. Berthoud’s City Star flat-out makes good beer. Denver Beer is an institution. Holidaily, an incredible innovator. Buckle up.

If the western slope means wine, then Pueblo increasingly means cannabis, and its Cannabis Manufacturer of the Year finalists may be starting a trend in the CMAs. But if Medically Correct is the geo outlier of cannabis finalists, from Denver, it’s also the gorilla of this group. Win or not, NuVue Pharma may well lead cannabis into a new science-based paradigm, while city-mate Stratos continues to impress. You can trust Colorado brands.

The Storm Cellar barely missed out on the finals in the inaugural Colorado Winery of the Year award last year, then went on to win gold at the 2020 American Fine Wine Competition and numerous other medals and accolades. (Take that, CMAs.) Innovation is now a calling card of Colorado wine, coursing through established wineries like Carlson Vineyards and Palisade neighbor Sauvage Spectrum. Stubbornly slow to change, the Colorado wine ecosystem is suddenly awake — and on fire. Will a CMA shift the balance of power to Hotchkiss?

Achievement

Colorado Manufacturing Woman of the Year

Amy Olson | Ready Foods | Denver

Alexandra Gold | Solid Power | Louisville

Heidi Hostetter | H2 Manufacturing Solutions | Longmont

Business Innovation | COVID-19 Response

OraLabs | Parker

LightDeck Diagnostics | Boulder

Titan Robotics | Colorado Springs

Advanced Manufacturing & Machining Award

Titan Robotics | Colorado Springs

Focused On Machining | Sedalia

Linear Manufacturing | Colorado Springs

Judging by the number of nominations, the Women in Manufacturing (WiM) Colorado Chapter is building a high-power following. The women who emerged from WiM board deliberations are leading in different industries — and different ways. Heidi Hostetter has been a finalist all three years of the award and works to advance manufacturing through a variety of initiatives. Alexandra Gold and Amy Olson lead in successful, innovative organizations. I don’t envy WiM’s choice after an impossible decision to narrow the category down to three finalists, but the celebration is off-the-charts worth it.

The Advanced Manufacturing & Machining award — CAMA AMMA as we call it, given the trade group‘s proctoring of nominations — measures continuous improvement through organizational investments. The selection committee was so impressed with the quality of nominees that it considered several of the companies for separate industry awards. A win-win. We’re anxious to report on the outcome.

Manufacturing’s stature has risen through the pandemic and for good reason: companies pivoted to provide key materials lacking in the U.S. supply chain. (Have we heard that before?) OraLabs and Titan Robotics contributed PPE and other material help. LightDeck Diagnostics (formerly MBio) crashed the national scene with a COVID-19 Total Antibody Test that detects antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 virus to determine prior infection. Crazy innovative things are happening in Boulder County in manufacturing. See above.

Can anyone say bracket challenge?

We’ll be featuring all the finalists the next six weeks in the run-up to the 2021 CMA Winners Reveal and Finale, April 29. REGISTER HERE.

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

Industry Voice: Keys to a cut-and-sew comeback

In response to CompanyWeek Publisher Bart Taylor’s Feb. 21 column on reshoring, I think it important to consider a couple of points when thinking about sewing in the USA.

  1. American sewing operations will not look like Chinese shops. The Americans will either sew in smaller teams with more cross training and flexibility, i.e., more of a small batch/workshop mentality. Or they will automate larger commodity based sewing operations. The industry is on the edge of a revolution in automation and the robots will be happy to slug it out with Asian factories 24/7.

  2. For brands that sell direct, American manufacturing is currently more than competitive with street retail pricing. The 50-plus percent margin that street retailers demand doubles the wholesale price to their customers. Without that markup, brands that sell directly to their community have room in their cost of goods for American manufacturing.

  3. American fabric mills are some of the best in the world with the most arcane business practices imaginable. Until the American textile industry figures out their relationship with jobbers and drops their insistence on selling full dye lots, small- and medium-sized sewn goods makers will struggle. In order to prosper, the American sewn goods makers need access to a wide variety of textiles in modern colors.

  4. Apparel pattern-making software and digital cutting has to catch up to the times. I can buy an AutoCAD clone for $99 but it is $10,000 to touch digital pattern-making software, and that is without the hardware and yearly license fee. Open-source software and low-cost digital cutting are critical to all aspects of a healthy sewn goods industry. Factory efficiency, communication, and innovation all depend on us being able to communicate with each other in a 21st century manner.

The sewn goods industry in the United States must be reimagined with these four points in mind. Without a modern production vision, flexible supply chain, and high-tech tools, it will stay much as it is.

Kurt Gray is a consultant in the apparel industry. Contact him at simplygraydesign@gmail.com.

The new American manufacturing policy should be clear: No job left behind

Any discussion of reshoring manufacturing jobs from China to the U.S. runs headlong into two realities.

First, American OEMs and brands outsource manufacturing for a reason: the combination of skilled labor, infrastructure, and materials in China is often unavailable onshore. As good as it sounds to reshore production — and the benefits of domestic manufacturing are compounding — companies must first ask the question, “Exactly what am I reshoring to?”

An inadequate supply chain in the U.S. provides an easy answer for many companies. Or, as Phunkshun Wear president Jay Badgley told me, “Reshoring was a term I heard frequently when the tariffs were announced, but I haven’t heard any manufacturer use it in months. I don’t know of any apparel brand that’s reshoring.”

Badgley’s outdoor industry apparel brand manufactures in Denver. He’s an outlier in an industry that found qualified, cheap labor in Asia decades ago, and that hasn’t looked back. Today the factories in China — and Vietnam and Bangladesh and other Asian outposts — that make shoes, apparel, accessories, and components used in the assembly of any of a thousand products, are world-class, funded by brands in America and around the world.

This, then, is the other barrier: As much as they’re demonized here, China’s a rational actor — and a manufacturing superpower. Meaning, they won’t give up manufacturing jobs easily. The Chinese have used U.S. investments in people and factories to build a highly advanced manufacturing ecosystem. As Badgley says, “Look at a jacket from The North Face. It’s a thing of beauty. The stitching, the technology, the quality. That coat couldn’t be made here, for a reasonable price.”

China is also incentivized to maintain superpower status by its staggering demographic conundrum. Sarah Rathke, a partner at Squire Patton Boggs and speaker last week at CompanyWeek’s Supply Chain Reality Check webcast, turned me on to James Kynge’s China Shakes The World.

Kynge says this about what he calls China’s “population paradox”: “Even when the economy grows at 9 or 10 percent, it fails by a margin of several million to create the 24 million new jobs required each year. So while China appears to the rest of the world to be enjoying an amazing growth bonanza, the officials working behind the high walls of their leadership compound in Beijing feel trapped in an endless employment crisis.”

Rathke says these are primarily manufacturing jobs, noting, “The 24 million annual figure covers both new entrants into the job market, and a certain amount of transition by rural citizens, each year, to urban manufacturing work.”

Facing the daunting prospect of creating 20+ million jobs every year, it’s a certainty China will redouble efforts to keep every single American brand happy, and every job in China.

What, then, can we do to reshore a mere 5 million manufacturing jobs, a number that according to the Reshoring Initiative‘s Harry Moser, would balance American trade deficit and set the U.S. back on a path to providing companies here more domestic options.

Reduce costs, for one. Moser estimates that through a combination of workforce training, more deliberate management of the value of the dollar, and a cohesive pro-manufacturing industrial policy, the U.S. must lower its across-the-board manufacturing costs by 20 percent to be competitive with China. (Hear Moser outline the numbers in the CompanyWeek webcast.)

Moreover, it’s clear we can’t displace China as the global manufacturing leader. We can’t make everything. China moves millions of citizens into manufacturing work every year. Manufacturing, and manufacturing alone, is the engine that moves millions of Chinese into the middle class.

If we can’t make everything, what should we make?

It’s here that a new U.S. industrial policy must be more nuanced than the current dialogue. We know products and components purchased with federal dollars will be a priority, especially in biotechnology, defense, and other national security-related industries. We know a new generation of consumer-led manufacturing in consumer categories — like food and beverage, as well as transportation — is already powering a U.S. manufacturing comeback.

What then, of other industries manufacturing offshore and dependent today on outsourced labor and infrastructure? The current thinking is that some just aren’t “strategic,” or that barriers are too great to justify investing in more U.S. production.

It’s the wrong approach. Public and private actors should collaborate to find ways to encourage more domestic production in even the toughest industries — like apparel. Moser’s cost formula is a foundation.

And who would argue that the outdoor industry, for example, isn’t a “strategic” economic sector? Very few in America’s West. But if we can’t cut and sew, what should we do here to help companies bring production home, even incrementally? What can be accomplished here, with American assets, ingenuity, and inspiration?

With the idea that no job that can be done here should be left offshore, this is the question that should occupy manufacturing advocates across a dozen industries.

No soldier left behind. Booyah.

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

Biden can avoid repeating Trump’s failures on reshoring. Here’s his difficult path

Reshoring is the topic of the day in manufacturing, and for good reason. Bringing back five million jobs to the U.S. — a goal of President Biden’s — would “balance the U.S. $800 billion/year goods trade deficit,” says Harry Moser, founder of the Reshoring Initiative.

Balancing the trade deficit would be just one benefit of many. We’d have also addressed financial and public-policy challenges that, according to Moser, simply make it too expensive for many companies to manufacture in the U.S. “If their cost is too high versus offshore, they will eventually fail,” he says. “Do all the things we need to do, and the work will come back because it will be profitable to make the product here.”

In a just-published analysis, “Review of Trump’s Results and Critique of Biden’s Reshoring Plans,” Moser expands on his prescription for reshoring success through the lens of policies enacted by President Trump and those proposed by President Biden. His conclusion is sobering: U.S. competitiveness starts by reducing U.S. costs by 20 percent vs. offshore competition; requires a lower U.S. dollar; and needs more students choosing a manufacturing apprenticeship or engineering degree instead of a liberal arts degree. Unless he takes action to achieve these outcomes, Moser believes, “Biden will repeat Trump’s failure.”

Moser’s review of Donald Trump’s reshoring legacy notes his fast start. “The number of reshoring and FDI [foreign direct investment] jobs announced coming to the U.S. surged from 75,000 in 2015 to 115,000 in 2016 and 193,000 in 2017,” driven largely by “reductions in corporate tax rates and regulations, and a generally business-friendly environment.”

But Trump’s confusing tariffs and narrow view of China-U.S. trade slowed progress. “Tariffing steel but not steel products put U.S. manufacturing, other than steel producers, at a competitive disadvantage,” notes Moser. “Tariffing China caused work to shift to other Southeast Asian countries.”

A growing trade deficit — from $679 billion in 2016 to $854 billion in 2019 — was “clearly not a successful result,” adds Moser. Trump’s inattention to the value of the U.S. dollar proved a “strong headwind.” Through 2019, “The Broad Dollar Index averaged 10 percent to 15 percent higher than during the Obama terms,” Moser explains.

His conclusion: “President Trump successfully alerted the nation to the dangers of a huge and growing trade deficit and China’s economic threat, but failed to attack the root cause of the problem — uncompetitive U.S. manufacturing costs — because of an overvalued dollar and inadequate skilled workforce.”

Lost in the racket surrounding President Biden’s first few weeks has been his focus on manufacturing, more perhaps, than any incoming president the past 50 years. As a result, there’s plenty to critique. Moser hones in on workforce training and wellbeing, like strengthening the Affordable Care Act, and targeted tariffs and tax incentives, including a new Made in America tax credit, as positive aspects in Biden’s new plan.

He also doesn’t lose sight of his main thesis — lowering the cost of manufacturing in the U.S. — in criticizing other Biden proposals, like a minimum wage hike, raising the corporate tax rate from 21 to 28 percent, and the push for a strong U.S. dollar, a stated goal of new U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen.

Moser also pushes back on a list of policy proposals that, however well intended, make the task of developing a new 21st century manufacturing workforce that much harder. Lowering the eligibility for Medicare to 60, “will cause more workers to retire early,” he asserts, even as making college free for families with annual incomes under $125,000will shift more smart students from skills training and engineering to liberal arts degrees,” undermining U.S. competitiveness.

Moser’s lasting contribution to the reshoring dialogue may well be his sustained focus on total cost of ownership — simply doing the math for individual companies looking to bring work home and U.S. policymakers at large. Lasting momentum requires cost equity at home.

At the same time, it seems unlikely the standalone pieces will come together, as Moser suggests, without a true national industrial policy guiding their implementation. President Biden is adding pieces to a plan that his predecessor began. Biden’s manufacturing legacy may pivot on his ability to elevate reshoring and U.S. manufacturing into a moonshot-like strategy — a national imperative.

The ROI to America’s lasting economic health would be worth the effort.

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


Watch Harry Moser, with Bart Taylor, explore total cost of ownership trends and other supply chain and reshoring issues Thursday, February 18, 10 a.m. – 11 a.m. MST, at CompanyWeek’s Need to Know: Supply Chain Reality Check webinar. With supply-chain experts Sarah Rathke and John Boner.

REGISTER HERE>>

No fees to register.

U.S. manufacturing is poised for a breakout, but the last mile seems impossibly hard

The business leaders who navigate America’s diminished supply chain to successfully manufacture in the U.S. also carry with them a hard-edged realism about domestic production.

The facts on the ground are these: It’s damn hard in many cases to travel the last mile, to see it through with U.S. fabricators and suppliers when so many core manufacturing capabilities, materials, and expertise are elusive. Or offshore.

Pete Wagner makes award-winning skis from an idyllic perch in Telluride, Colorado. His innovation is changing the sport: Skiers provide a full range of biometrics to optimize the performance “fit” of a ski, information that’s processed by Wagner’s technology suite to fully customize the product for a buyer. It’s every bit the digitization of American manufacturing we read about weekly.

Yet to the extent manufacturing’s digital evolution is key to its future, it’s not the primary barrier for Wagner to make skis in the U.S.

“Our company, our brand, is all about American-made and sourcing everything we possibly can in the U.S.,” Wagner says. “But occasionally we run into an issue that speaks to what U.S. manufacturing has lost.”

Wagner offered the example of his national search for a key component. “We buy an anodized aluminum alloy from a company in Austria that’s used in our skis. I wanted to source the material from a U.S. company,” he explains. “I figured it must be available for aerospace or other applications. I talked with some great people in the U.S. aluminum industry. After getting material analysis done, I was told that we can’t get a similar type of high performance alloy material in that configuration from a U.S supplier.

“It makes you question how much we value manufacturing in the U.S.,” he adds. “Or, it’s just a smart business decision, given the global market. Either way, it makes it tough.”

Wagner’s frustration plays out by orders of magnitude for other companies, and for entire industries, including his own. Wagner Custom Skis is an anomaly in America’s burgeoning outdoor industry; few of its leading companies are committed to U.S. production. Some can’t. Some don’t try. So the topic is largely avoided, or relegated to the back burner by other more positive story lines.

Others are less sanguine about America’s industrial state, including the Pentagon. Metalcraft Industries CEO Larry Caschette pointed me to a U.S. Department of Defense Industrial Capabilities Report to Congress with this rather grim assessment:

“[The] Department of Defense is still the colossus of the federal system, i.e., the single biggest buyer of goods in the U.S. government. But unless the industrial and manufacturing base that develops and builds those goods modernizes and adjusts to the world’s new geopolitical and economic realities, America will face a growing and likely permanent national security deficit.”

Caschette is encouraging manufacturing enthusiasts to tag the report in messages to elected officials to reinforce the findings. Framing U.S. manufacturing as a “national security” issue certainly gets the attention of elected types.

It’s also hard to imagine how the DoD’s prescription comes to fruition without more vigorous public sector support. Per the report, a “national defense industrial strategy” is needed, a four-part program to:

  1. Reshore our defense industrial base and supply chains to the United States and to allies, starting with microelectronics, and restore our shipbuilding base.
  2. Build a modern manufacturing and engineering workforce and research and development (R&D) base.
  3. Continue to modernize the defense acquisition process to fit 21st century realities.
  4. Find new ways to partner private sector innovation with public sector resources and demand. All these steps will be necessary to create a robust, resilient, secure, and innovative industrial base.

It’s stuff we write about every week.

But how much will government intervention truly help, even with a new and exciting “industrial strategy,” to reshore our industrial base? Can the U.S. government also build a modern R&D ecosystem?

American companies in part funded China’s world-class supply chain. Cheap labor and short-term profits were too hard to pass up. Now it’s up to us to bring it home. Let’s earmark substantial public sector support to hasten its reshoring as we take matters into our hands.

One good outcome would be locating anodized aluminum alloy for an intrepid American manufacturer. Let’s work on a thousand more. One company at a time.

Bart Taylor is publisher of CompanyWeek. Contact him with a source or supplier for Wagner Custom Skis, or reach him at btaylor@companyweek.com.

Shut the front door: Why NAM’s Trump rebuke is a shocker

To say I was surprised to read Jay Timmons, president and CEO of the National Association of Manufacturers, encouraging Vice President Mike Pence last week to remove Donald Trump from office by invoking the 25th Amendment would be an understatement.

I’ve met Timmons several times and of course follow NAM on any number of issues impacting manufacturing. More than not, I’ve questioned NAM’s relevance, its connectedness, to a manufacturing sector overwhelmingly composed of small manufacturers that share very little in the spoils of the association’s big-company funded work.

NAM is also a political organization, and its politics tilt right. Timmons tacitly acknowledged as much in his statement last week. At times, the organization’s conservative posture has hamstrung its ability to speak for a sector busting out along progressive lines. I said as much in a 2015 column, “NAM’s love/hate relationship with President Obama reflects industry in transition”:

Taken as a whole, [NAM’s] well-intentioned if somewhat confusing policy evolution reflects an industry in transition. Manufacturing is changing. It’s tech-driven — digital; it’s agile, small business; it’s young and lifestyle-driven to suit trends and changing consumer preferences; it’s beer and organic food at the same time it’s steel and paper, fabricating and welding.

It’s changing and NAM and Timmons are trying hard to adapt — however confusing and disruptive the journey may be.

Yet Timmons wasted no time in breaking from the president. He could have waited. The certainty, the immediacy of NAM’s pronouncement, was a surprise. Was it courageous? Maybe. It certainly wasn’t easy given Timmons’, and NAM’s, history.

Today, as I read my past comments about NAM and Timmons, I admit my own perspective has also changed. It’s a good time to fess up. In a 2018 column, “NAM’s politics shortchange small manufacturers,” I argued for “reducing — not expanding — import restrictions and tariffs on targeted raw material categories to enhance local and regional supply chains.”

Today I’m a proponent of a trade strategy that protects U.S. manufacturers in select industries with whatever means are effective, including tariffs. We require no more evidence of the harmful effects of unfettered globalization, including unreciprocated access to offshore markets, to American companies and workers.

A position that leaves me, again, at odds with NAM. Yet for one week, during these incredible times, all manufacturers can celebrate Jay Timmons and hope that America’s preeminent manufacturing association can next time convince a vice president to do the right thing.

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

Five predictions for California manufacturing in 2021

In February 2020, I said this about California manufacturing employment:

In sum, California is well-positioned for growth in the industries that promise to reshape U.S. manufacturing; to capture a higher percentage of the domestic jobs that do materialize in the 2020’s. For every job lost in apparel manufacturing, others are materializing across the region. Will they materialize here?

Since then, we know that COVID-19 has accelerated trends that were favoring domestic manufacturing before the pandemic, and that California stands to benefit. Here, then, are five predictions for California manufacturing in 2021, a year that stands to end much better than how it’s beginning, with a percentage guess as to the likelihood of each coming true:

1. Manufacturing’s beachhead expands as more companies evaluate domestic production options

The local and regional manufacturing comeback we chronicle every month is now a national story. In “Five Predictions For The Manufacturing Industry in 2021,” Forbes columnist Amar Hanspa belatedly forecasts:

We’ll see a shift to localized production. In 2021, the industrial manufacturing sector will take a page from the consumer-driven “farm to table” trend that has taken hold in the agriculture industry over the last decade, with a shift to localized production. This will primarily be driven by the threat of ongoing trade war/tariffs threatening global supply chains, encouraging manufacturers to move production activity closer to the customer. In the future, manufacturers will want to build where they sell for several reasons, including faster time to market, lower working capital, government policies, and increased resiliency. This won’t be an easy or overnight shift.

The “shift” is already underway. In California, that spells growth. The state is already an epicenter to companies in established industries like food, beverage, aerospace, and energy. Expect growth in new industries and sectors that have been more resistant to onshore production, like consumer and medical products, outdoor industry, and precision-machined parts.

Harry Moser, founder of the Reshoring Initiative and an authority on the economics of domestic production, ranked his top three sectors for CompanyWeek: “The hottest items in 2020 and 2021 are PPE and other medical products such as antibiotics,” he says, noting that “60 percent of companies reshoring production since March 2020 mentioned COVID as one cause.”

Moser continues, “Second, other essential or politically timely items with supply chain gaps, such as rare earth minerals, defense materiel, electronics, solar, and wind. Then, anything else now coming from China. Biden has said he will not end the China tariffs soon” — meaning companies manufacturing in China will be in the hunt for domestic options.

It adds up to a growth year for U.S. — and California manufacturing.

Likelihood: 80%

2. Free trade is dead

Even before COVID, tariffs exposed America’s sub-par manufacturing supply chain, but more, the lack of a trade strategy. As The Wall Street Journal noted, Trump tariffs resulted in a mishmash of outcomes that benefitted well-connected companies, but left others wanting.

Forget the notion of unfettered globalization — even for a top 10 global economy like California’s. State officials should lobby for targeted protection in promising local industries like bioscience, where cheap and subpar Asian products handicap manufacturers and force healthcare buyers to choose products made offshore.

President-elect Joe Biden has signaled a renewed commitment to manufacturing through the invaluable NIST MEP network. It’s a great start. California Governor Gavin Newsom and his team at the Office of Business and Economic Development (GO-Biz) must also take the lead on a regional plan that protects and accelerates promising manufacturing industries.

Likelihood: 15%

3. A small but influential cadre of pro-California manufacturers will push back on the relocation narrative

More a wish than a prediction, perhaps, but one silver lining from the steady stream of high-profile exits is that pro-CA companies begin to push back on the narrative.

And why not? As manufacturing’s brand ascends, California’s manufacturing assets become more valuable. Its R&D ecosystem is second to none, spinning off both technologies and companies that are changing domestic production to the core. But the depth and expertise of businesses in CA’s supply chain, in key industries like aerospace and transportation, is the state’s unheralded attribute.

With such quality companies, captained by California advocates like Pamela Kan at Bishop-Wisecarver, and Hale Foote at Scandic (read Inside the Tesla supply chain: Hale Foote and Scandic), and others that comprise CompanyWeek’s cadre of California Leaders, manufacturing in California is in a position to make positive noise.

Will it?

Likelihood: 50%

4. Workforce health will become big business, and manufacturers will play a leading role

Manufacturing’s stock rose in ’20 in part because U.S. companies rushed in to fill the void in PPE. The trend continues in ’21 as manufacturers innovate to build solutions that keep our public places safe, but more, keep factories and consumer-facing production facilities like breweries and restaurants open.

It’s the latest noble endeavor for a sector that built the arsenal of democracy and landed a man on the Moon. Coronaviruses have no chance.

Likelihood: 60%

5. The FDA will finally provide regulatory certainty for hemp cannabis producers — and the cannabis industry will explode.

It’s unfathomable that we lack official data as to how many employees work in the state’s billion dollar cannabis industry; how many work in manufacturing vs. other functional areas; how many work at state-regulated, federally illegal THC producers vs. unregulated but federally legal hemp companies; or how much of the growth manifest in chemical or food manufacturing the past few years is attributable to cannabis.

When, in 2021, the FDA regulates hemp-derived CBD products as a dietary supplement or food additive (or both), California’s cannabis ecosystem will leap forward, again. For suppliers and service companies, ambivalent about cannabis today, it will be too late to jump on the bandwagon. Get aligned, find industry partners, advocate for the Golden State’s homegrown industry — or watch from the sidelines.

Likelihood: 90%

Bonus forecast: CompanyWeek will report on 300 manufacturers in 2021

Here’s how we can help your company in 2021: If you haven’t been featured in CompanyWeek, send a note to Editor Eric Peterson to get on the editorial schedule.

The CompanyWeek “tribe” will expand in ’21 and along with it, contact and connections with new business and trade partners.

Likelihood: 95%

Buh-bye ’20. Hello ’21.

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

Five Colorado manufacturing predictions for 2021

Here was my forecast a year ago of five Colorado manufacturing storylines for 2020:

  1. Food’s undersized brand gets a lift
  2. Technology’s oversized reputation gets an overhaul
  3. Will Colorado’s global manufacturing brands engage more locally?
  4. Industrial cannabis is here. Like, right here.
  5. It won’t always be this easy

I was partly right: 2020 certainly wasn’t easy! Let’s dispense with last year and forecast the promising year ahead.

Here are five Colorado manufacturing predictions for 2021, with a percentage guess as to the likelihood of each coming true:

1. Manufacturing’s beachhead expands as more companies evaluate domestic production options

The local and regional manufacturing comeback we chronicle every week is now a national story. In Five Predictions For The Manufacturing Industry In 2021, Forbes columnist Amar Hanspa belatedly forecasts:

We’ll see a shift to localized production. In 2021, the industrial manufacturing sector will take a page from the consumer-driven “farm to table” trend that has taken hold in the agriculture industry over the last decade, with a shift to localized production. This will primarily be driven by the threat of ongoing trade war/tariffs threatening global supply chains, encouraging manufacturers to move production activity closer to the customer. In the future, manufacturers will want to build where they sell for several reasons, including faster time to market, lower working capital, government policies, and increased resiliency. This won’t be an easy or overnight shift.

The “shift” is already underway. In Colorado, that spells growth. The state is on fire with companies in established industries like food, beverage, aerospace, and energy. Expect growth in new industries and sectors that have been more resistant to onshore production, like consumer and medical products, outdoor industry, and precision-machined parts.

Harry Moser, founder of the Reshoring Initiative and an authority on the economics of domestic production, ranked his top three sectors for CompanyWeek: “The hottest items in 2020 and 2021 are PPE and other medical products such as antibiotics,” he says, noting that “60 percent of companies reshoring production since March 2020 mentioned COVID as one cause.”

Moser continues, “Second, other essential or politically timely items with supply chain gaps, such as rare earth minerals, defense materiel, electronics, solar, and wind. Then, anything else now coming from China. Biden has said he will not end the China tariffs soon” — meaning companies manufacturing in China will be in the hunt for domestic options.

It adds up to a growth year for U.S. — and Colorado manufacturing.

Likelihood: 80%

2. Free trade is dead

Even before COVID, tariffs exposed America’s sub-par manufacturing supply chain, but more, the lack of a trade strategy. As The Wall Street Journal noted, Trump tariffs resulted in a mishmash of outcomes that benefitted well-connected companies, but left others wanting.

Instead, Colorado’s D.C. contingent should lobby for targeted protection in promising local industries like bioscience, where cheap and subpar Asian products handicap manufacturers here. President-elect Joe Biden has signaled a renewed commitment to manufacturing through the invaluable NIST MEP network. It’s a great start. Colorado Governor Jared Polis and his team at the Office of Economic Development and International Trade don’t set trade policy, but can also lead with a regional plan that accelerates promising manufacturing industries and fuels a more capable supply chain.

Manufacturing is “essential” again, free trade is an outdated notion, and a new U.S. industrial strategy should use tariffs and other tactics to protect key manufacturing industries and jobs.

Likelihood: 15%

3. Tactics to recruit and support manufacturing in Colorado get better

With the benefits of domestic manufacturing now in focus, the tactics to recruit companies and sustain more local production are improving. And it’s all about the supply chain. In 2020, companies responding to COVID-related supply-chain disruptions often stared down a lack of viable domestic options. This must change — and will, even if incremental improvements are the ’21 reality.

New manufacturing “places” are also fueling innovation in the supply chain. Real estate developments designed for “clusters” of complementary manufacturing businesses should continue to proliferate. Grand Junction, Fort Collins/Loveland, Montrose, Boulder County — these communities are in the game. Who will follow? And will it be enough to compete on a national scale?

Likelihood: 50%

4. Workforce health will become big business, and manufacturers will play a leading role

Manufacturing’s stock rose in ’20 in part because U.S. companies rushed in to fill the void in PPE. The trend continues in ’21 as manufacturers innovate to build solutions that keep our public places safe, but more, keep factories and consumer-facing production facilities like breweries and restaurants open.

It’s the latest noble endeavor for a sector that built the arsenal of democracy and landed a man on the Moon. Coronaviruses have no chance.

Likelihood: 60%

5. The FDA will finally provide regulatory certainty for hemp cannabis producers — and Colorado’s cannabis industry will explode

It’s unfathomable that we lack official data as to how many employees work in the state’s $1.5 billion cannabis industry; how many work in manufacturing vs. other functional areas; how many work at state-regulated, federally illegal THC producers vs. unregulated but federally legal hemp companies; or how much of the growth manifest in chemical or food manufacturing the past few years is attributable to cannabis.

Here’s what we know: When, in 2021, the FDA regulates hemp-derived CBD products as a dietary supplement or food additive (or both), the state’s nation-leading cannabis ecosystem will leap forward, again. For suppliers and service companies, ambivalent about cannabis today, it will be too late to jump on the bandwagon. Get aligned, find industry partners, advocate for Colorado’s homegrown industry — or watch from the sidelines.

Likelihood: 90%

Bonus forecast: CompanyWeek will report on 300 manufacturers in 2021

Here’s how we can help your company in 2021: If you haven’t been featured in CompanyWeek, send a note to Editor Eric Peterson to get on the editorial schedule. The CompanyWeek “tribe” will expand in ’21 and along with it, contact and connections with new business and trade partners.

Likelihood: 95%

Buh-bye ’20. Hello ’21.

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