Where Politics Meets Quality

We can’t ignore the impact that policymaker misinformation has on industry

Published: Thursday, January 19, 2017 - 13:03

You’re going to see a bit of a departure in some Quality Digest coverage this year. Certainly on our webcast, Quality Digest Live, but even in our online editorial coverage. It is spurred in no small part by the incoming administration’s approach to dealing with U.S. manufacturing and the conversations that have followed. President-elect Trump has made it clear that he wants to keep or reshore U.S. jobs and reduce regulation, all with an eye toward rebuilding U.S. manufacturing and increasing U.S. jobs.

This a good thing. Here at QD we applaud any efforts at strengthening our workforce. And of course, it’s nothing new. It’s not as if past presidents were deliberately anti-manufacturing or anti-job growth (although some might argue legislation didn’t lead in that direction). The difference is in the methodology. More than any other president since President John F. Kennedy lambasted U.S. Steel in 1962, soon-to-be President Trump is calling out specific manufacturers: Toyota, Ford, Boeing, Carrier, Apple, etc. He is naming and shaming in order to drag them kicking and screaming into reshoring, or at least not offshoring.

Because of this, we believe the role of manufacturing and the actions of manufacturers will be in the spotlight in an unprecedented way during the next four years. The question is, will Trump’s approach work? Will it cause harm or good? Has the approach of previous administrations been too laissez faire? Has our industry and economy been waiting for the bare-knuckles approach that Trump served up during his campaign, and we assume will continue once he is sworn in?

In order to have these discussions, our readers must have the facts in front of them. People who don’t work within industry usually make overly broad assumptions or are outright mistaken, including our incoming president (e.g., the loss of manufacturing jobs is not all due to outsourcing, in fact automation and increased productivity play a larger role). The editors of Quality Digest feel it is our responsibility to call attention to misrepresentations or incorrect facts about the manufacturing industry no matter who they come from.

For instance, we have steadfastly maintained that there is indeed a skills gap, even when others have claimed no such gap exists. This gap is why so many companies have started their own recruiting/training departments, are partnering with high schools and community colleges in voc/tech programs, and doing everything they can to cultivate a workforce ready to take on the types of jobs they have available.

These topics and others are absolutely germane to what our readers do. For instance, the main reason companies outsource jobs is because it’s cheaper. It improves the bottom line. If a company is forced to manufacture in the United States even if it’s more expensive, it won’t be as if shareholders will no longer care about profit margins. Of course they will, and they won’t be happy seeing profits decrease.

Thus, how will companies maintain or increase margins all while maintaining quality and competitiveness? Some may cut staff or decrease wages and benefits. Some may increase prices. Either of which defeats the purpose of reshoring. And a lot will automate, even the ones who have already promised to stay here.

To determine if reshoring makes sense, you need the facts, both pro and con, in front of you. If you decide, based on these facts, that reshoring does make sense, then how do you run more efficiently to protect those margins?

That’s where QD comes in. Hopefully, companies will consider taking concepts like lean, the Toyota Production System, and all the other continuous-improvement methods discussed in QD more seriously, and we’re here to help.

What about management practices? Our leaders, whether company, industry, or government, should set the example for how we should lead. What is the best way to manage employees in order to cost-effectively maintain continuous improvement. How do you keep employees excited about producing the best products and services they can? Will CEOs look to Trump as an exemplar of a good or strong leader, or will they embrace the ideas of W. Edwards Deming or Joseph M. Juran? On an employee level, neither Deming nor Juran would have been fans of shaming. Deming, on the other hand, wasn’t above shaming management, so....

We understand that not all of our readers will feel comfortable with this new coverage. Some have already let us know how they feel. But politics and lawmakers have an effect on U.S. business. It would be remiss for us to not understand the implications and impacts of what coming legislation or presidential actions will bring and to put those considerations before our audience.

Some of you will pointedly point out that we have never looked at the political angle and its impact on our industry, so why now? Because never in our 35-year history have we encountered a political climate that operated, openly at least, in the fashion that we are seeing evolve today, e.g., open attacks on companies and, by proxy, their industry, based on sketchy or just plain wrong information. In an era of uninformed news about our industry, it is our job to keep the facts in front our audience. You can do with them as you please.

We will, of course, attempt to do all this in the most transparent, respectful, and even-handed way we can. Feel free to agree or disagree. That’s what the comments section below each article is for. We look forward to providing you a balanced look at how this year’s policies and policymakers will impact tomorrow’s jobs.

About The Author

Dirk Dusharme @ Quality Digest

Dirk Dusharme is Quality Digest’s editor in chief.