Westerville, OH ― Ellen Marrison reports in the State Science & Technology Institute (SSTI) news blog that the U.S. ranks second on a global manufacturing competitiveness index, according to the 2016 Global Manufacturing Competitiveness Index by research firm Deloitte Global and the Council on Competitiveness.
The U.S. ranking has improved in each of the past studies and is poised to take over that top spot from China by 2020, the study maintains.
However, executives from across the world in responding to the study, noted that talent is the leading factor in determining manufacturing competitiveness, and finding and cultivating that talent is a topic that has received increasing attention from the manufacturing sector.
While such rankings provide an interesting focal point, their real value lies in the discussion and attention focused on the subject matter.
SSTI recently interviewed several leading thinkers on the subject, finding common calls for changing the approach to the talent pipeline in manufacturing, as well as a cautionary note on rankings.
The U.S. ranking has improved in each of the past studies and is poised to take over that top spot from China by 2020, the study maintains.
However, executives from across the world in responding to the study, noted that talent is the leading factor in determining manufacturing competitiveness, and finding and cultivating that talent is a topic that has received increasing attention from the manufacturing sector.
While such rankings provide an interesting focal point, their real value lies in the discussion and attention focused on the subject matter.
SSTI recently interviewed several leading thinkers on the subject, finding common calls for changing the approach to the talent pipeline in manufacturing, as well as a cautionary note on rankings.
Sridhar Kota, director of MForesight, Alliance for Manufacturing Foresight, cautions that policy and issues surrounding competitiveness are somewhat different from those affecting innovation, and it is innovation that leads to new industries, while competitiveness applies to existing companies and is largely driven by regulations, taxes, affordable energy and access to tools and infrastructure.
The common factor, Sridhar maintains, is the availability of a highly skilled workforce at all levels.
While China may enjoy a low cost advantage in the manufacturing marketplace, it is Germany, which enjoys a robust manufacturing base, that the U.S. should be comparing itself to, Sridhar said. Germany enjoys a skilled workforce at all levels, from engineers to production workers.
One of the differences between the two countries is the desire among students to enter engineering careers, he said.
“There is a lack of interest in kids in going into engineering,” Kota said. “If we want to promote engineering, then we want to inspire kids about designing and making things.”
He said that while Germany excels in that regard, it is something this country has forgotten. To reignite that interest, we must return to the fundamentals like engineering education and apprenticeships.
While adults may have preconceived notions about dirty factory jobs, youths today don’t have the same notions. Those dirty jobs have largely been replaced; factories today are cleaner and demand a more highly skilled workforce that can operate computer numeric controlled (CNC) machines and perform other tasks.
To spark an interest in engineering and manufacturing, Kota recommends factory tours for students, inspiring them with how things are made and allowing them to create things. “Once inspired, some may choose to attend a four-year degree college to become an engineer and others may pursue vocational training to master the advanced manufacturing trades like CNC machining that are desperately needed in industry,” he said.
“At the end of the day, people here are more creative and more entrepreneurial than anywhere else,” Kota said. “When we lose that, what will we have?”
Ned Hill, a professor of public affairs at the John Glenn College of Public Affairs at Ohio State, says there are components of the Deloitte study that align with his research, but such reports make no guarantee of future standings.
Looking ahead, manufacturing competitiveness will be dependent on many factors, including a country’s financial stability. While the U.S. is more stable, the European Union is facing more uncertainty with Brexit and China is subject to greater politics, Hill said.
What he sees as some of the drivers shaping the manufacturing environment are the forces driving the new digital factory floor. Once mass customization can be achieved in real time, and machine intelligence increases, the intermediary labor market will be reshaped and there will be a higher demand for new tech-based jobs, Hill said.
For the rest SSTI’s story, click here.
The common factor, Sridhar maintains, is the availability of a highly skilled workforce at all levels.
While China may enjoy a low cost advantage in the manufacturing marketplace, it is Germany, which enjoys a robust manufacturing base, that the U.S. should be comparing itself to, Sridhar said. Germany enjoys a skilled workforce at all levels, from engineers to production workers.
One of the differences between the two countries is the desire among students to enter engineering careers, he said.
“There is a lack of interest in kids in going into engineering,” Kota said. “If we want to promote engineering, then we want to inspire kids about designing and making things.”
He said that while Germany excels in that regard, it is something this country has forgotten. To reignite that interest, we must return to the fundamentals like engineering education and apprenticeships.
While adults may have preconceived notions about dirty factory jobs, youths today don’t have the same notions. Those dirty jobs have largely been replaced; factories today are cleaner and demand a more highly skilled workforce that can operate computer numeric controlled (CNC) machines and perform other tasks.
To spark an interest in engineering and manufacturing, Kota recommends factory tours for students, inspiring them with how things are made and allowing them to create things. “Once inspired, some may choose to attend a four-year degree college to become an engineer and others may pursue vocational training to master the advanced manufacturing trades like CNC machining that are desperately needed in industry,” he said.
“At the end of the day, people here are more creative and more entrepreneurial than anywhere else,” Kota said. “When we lose that, what will we have?”
Ned Hill, a professor of public affairs at the John Glenn College of Public Affairs at Ohio State, says there are components of the Deloitte study that align with his research, but such reports make no guarantee of future standings.
Looking ahead, manufacturing competitiveness will be dependent on many factors, including a country’s financial stability. While the U.S. is more stable, the European Union is facing more uncertainty with Brexit and China is subject to greater politics, Hill said.
What he sees as some of the drivers shaping the manufacturing environment are the forces driving the new digital factory floor. Once mass customization can be achieved in real time, and machine intelligence increases, the intermediary labor market will be reshaped and there will be a higher demand for new tech-based jobs, Hill said.
For the rest SSTI’s story, click here.
