Who is John Walley?
John is an experienced shareholder, director, manager and technologist with significant international experience in strategy, technology, product development, operations and intellectual property management.
[ read more ]

RT @McKQuarterly: Chart Focus: Why companies aren't investing http://t.co/RNQBDOVc
31/01/2012 8:15 a.m.
Accountability needed on poor economic performance http://t.co/bOhJVOnd
20/01/2012 3:02 p.m.
RT @McKQuarterly: Working out of debt http://t.co/dSWdW2sc - some doing better than others.
20/01/2012 9:14 a.m.
RT @McKQuarterly: Economic Conditions Snapshot, December 2011: McKinsey Global Survey results http://t.co/qL3aCR4x
23/12/2011 8:51 a.m.




Print-friendly
22
APR

Where production goes R&D follows


5 comment(s) Posted in: Conventional

There has been some talk recently about the off-shoring of production activity and how, provided the Research and Development (R&D) teams stay in New Zealand, this can be a viable option. Shamubeel Eaqub, principal economist for the NZIER promoted this view in a Herald article saying, “Just because the production process is moving overseas does not necessarily mean it’s a bad thing. What we do have in New Zealand, and in most advanced economies, is a very skilled labour force and that is where we are most suited - management and R&D and those more innovative processes.” While it is true that a skilled labour force provides New Zealand’s competitive advantage, moving production offshore removes some vital links between the engineers, designers and those dealing with the hands on production process. Experience has shown that a lowest cost solution requires co-location

This unfounded apathy to off-shoring was also evident from the previous Labour led Government which produced a Cabinet Paper in 2007 called ‘Advancing Economic Transformation’, where Paragraph 53 said:

The key challenges arising from international integration are for New Zealand to:

a. Position itself as an attractive location for investment and skills and for those parts of international supply chains that relate to high-value products and activities and that provide the greatest return (e.g. R&D and design). This includes an imperative to develop more and/or larger internationally successful New Zealand businesses, networks of businesses, and segments of the economy; and

b. Capture the best return through our businesses being part of international value chains offshore (return profits to New Zealand), through developing new business models of operating internationally (such as investing directly in offshore product and distribution chains), rather than transferring valuable activities offshore.
Ministry of Economic Development,
http://www.med.govt.nz/templates/MultipageDocumentTOC____32344.aspx

Again, the intentions of this document cannot be faulted but it ignores the influence of scale and interactions throughout the steps in the manufacturing process. As a trivial example, an engineer may realise, on visiting the factory floor or interacting with production staff, that a change in design could dramatically decrease the time taken to produce a product. This sort of interaction is lost if the different elements are separated.

The need to offshore is premised on the assumption that New Zealand cannot compete with lower wages overseas. In reality, wage costs are a fairly minor component of the overall cost and competitiveness of the manufacturing enterprise; often the cost of management of remote operations can more than consume the obvious savings. It is worth noting that a direct labour content of less than five percent of sales is not unusual in high technology products, and exchange rate fluctuations could have ten times the impact of the difference in labour rates.

We must look to keep as much activity, whether production or design, in New Zealand. End to end skills and capabilities embedded in an economy provide options and opportunities for that economy; gaps and shortcomings limit choices and opportunities. This means offering a stable exchange rate regime to stabilise returns for exporters in job number one. Offering R&D incentives to encourage firms to base themselves here and offering incentives to aid investment in new technology are also helpful. These initiatives would mitigate the significance of New Zealand’s higher wage rates and encourage manufacturers to integrate their supply chains here.

If we allow some bits of the supply chain to go offshore then more will follow, it is an insidious process of loss. While developing countries may not currently have the expertise to carry out design and engineering work, that capacity will soon develop if there is a significant presence in a particular industry. If there are better incentives for design and engineering work overseas the process of hollowing out skills and capability in our economy will be accelerated.

Our future must, in part, be based on sending more and more products to export markets holding more and more of the value chain to provide the jobs and the maximum economic benefit to the New Zealand economy.
 


Graham Selman - 22 April 2010 at 11:41 a.m.
I could not agree more with your comments on "where the production goes..". I have had several conversations just this week on that very topic with other manufacturers, spurred on in part at least by Mr Eaqub's published comments.

It is a dangerous position and nonsense to boot, but is being foisted on us via the media, mainly by people who have spent their entire life in university and academic/economic circles. It appeals to many as a plausible theory of how to advance New Zealand Inc. and lead to fabulously well paid jobs without getting dirt on our hands.

We are sending hordes of young people into tertiary education to pursue courses such as engineering, and my fear is that there will be a diminishing number of jobs in this country where they can use their education (as a former apprentice, I include trades jobs in this).

Your article needs to be published in the news media, preferably on the front page, to stimulate some sensible debate on these theories before we reach a position where we can only look to the past for examples of manufacturing excellence done here in New Zealand.
Timothy Allan - 14 August 2010 at 12:41 p.m.
An interesting article and response. It prompted me to think about the Dimbleby lecture in 2004 by James Dyson. http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2004/12_december/09/dyson.shtml.

Dyson at his erudite best sums it up well. There is alot of parity to the situation in New Zealand. It is a harrowing look forward if not enough attention is paid to developing innovative new technologies and being at the technology fore front.

R&D activity needs to be supported heavily to encourage the best minds to seek a career in science, engineering and design rather than law or accounting ( the seeming mainstays of the NZ business scene ).

As Dyson points out losing manufacturing contains with it some unstable risks, that need to be clearly isolated and dealt with through the development of serious innovation.

New Zealand needs to become more adept at commercialising innovation and retaining control to ensure that wealth can be created and the technology built apon for future benefit.

Many lauded business successes ultimately lead to the loss of control with the list too long to mention here. We need to harness the innovative nature of our culture but work out better ways of retaining control and benefitting over a more extended period of time. The companies that make things are still the primary underwriter of the NZ economy earning the foreign exchange that is vital for our future.

Last modified: 14/08/2010 12:45:08 p.m.
John Walley - 15 August 2010 at 9:50 a.m.
Dyson's skill is clearly demonstrated by the price his brand and products command in the market. As a “maker of useful and attractive things” Dyson clearly understands the simple fact that nothing is built by simply cutting costs and somewhere we have to start up the spiral that it is so easy to slide down.

Emerging economies have focused on building skills and capability, assisted by the western corporations thirst for margin and western consumers desperate for cheap goods. All good as long as debt grew and there were sufficient jobs in finance, services and what was left of manufacturing. The wheels fall off when debt is maxed out, people lose jobs and the “leveraged” growth is show for what it always was – a fiscal illusion.

New Zealand’s future depends on thinking like an emerging economy, looking to local needs first, building local capability and investment – that means a stable external economy. I sincerely wish we had someone running this country that made their fortune like Dyson, sadly we have one of the people whose skills authored the global financial crisis in that job.


Last modified: 15/08/2010 9:51:35 a.m.
Saudi Jobs - 26 September 2010 at 7:03 a.m.
been following your blog for 3 days now and i should say i am starting to like your post. and now how do i subscribe to your blog?


John Walley - 26 September 2010 at 16:23 p.m.
Just hit the RSS feed all posts are on the feed.

Name:
Email:
Website URL:
Comment:
Remember Me:
Email Replies:
Please play the ball not the man.