Welcome to Jera’s New Site!

Featured

Jera Sustainable Development

A Pragmatic Approach to Sustainability for Smaller Manufacturers

 

Jera Logo white with caption centeredWelcome to Jera’s new blog-centered website. New essays are posted weekly, as in the past. All of the 250+ essays posted during the past five years are still available. Scroll down to see past posts, most recent first 

… Chuck Harrington

The Triple Bottom Line – Up Close and Personal

3P GraphicThe Triple Bottom Line model for Sustainability emphasizes the interdependence of the natural world, productive industry (which includes manufacturing, mining and agriculture) and human society. “Triple Bottom Line” sounds almost trite when read or said. However, when I look out my bedroom window, I have a vivid example of that interdependence literally right in front of me — the Verde River Green Zone.

The Edge of the Wild, a post to this blog from nearly two years ago, takes an up close and personal look at the Triple Bottom Line. – C.H.


The Edge of the Wild (from 9 December 2014)

The Verde River and Its Green Zone

My house is on a bluff, above and overlooking the upper reaches of the Verde River in the high desert of central Arizona. The Verde isn’t very big. However, its source is on the Mogollon Rim (a long stretch of stark cliffs marking the edge of the Colorado Plateau), fed from the 12,600’+ heights of the San Francisco Peaks. So, unlike many rivers and streams in Arizona, it rather reliably has water in it. (About 90% of all streams in Arizona are “ephemeral”, meaning they are dry except after heavy rains – which are rare.) Not surprisingly, the Verde is Arizona’s only federally designated Wild and Scenic River.

Sycamore Canyon RailwayThe Verde supports a narrow riparian green zone, typically spanning a hundred yards or so. The green zone, with its trees and foliage, stands in sharp contrast to the rocks and scrub of the adjacent desert. Riparian zones are quite rare in Arizona, constituting only about 0.4% of the land. Development within the riparian zone is hindered, since almost all of the land within the zone is subject to flash floods. Also, much of the land adjoining the river is within national forests, or is otherwise public property.

In Arizona, a few, thin riparian zones support an abundance of wildlife – coyote, javelin, waterfowl, eagles, hawks, hummingbirds and much more, including a significant number of endangered species. Riparian zones, to beg the obvious, are critical to biodiversity in arid Arizona.[1]

Little Daisy

Arizona is nicknamed “The Copper State”. The Little Daisy mine, extensively developed just in time to supply copper for the First World War, had a lot to do with that. The Little Daisy is on the slope of Mingus Mountain. Copper ore was moved down the mountain to be processed and smelted near Clarkdale, on the banks of the Verde. Mine tailings went along with the ore.[2]

There are a fair number of photographs of copper mining and refining operations here, many from a century ago. Suffice it to say that early 20th century copper mining was an environmental calamity.

Tuzigoot

Tuzigoot National MonumentTuzigoot National Monument stands near the Verde, about two miles downriver from Clarkdale. Tuzigoot is an archeological site where ruins from the Sinaguan Native American culture have been unearthed and partially reconstructed. The Sinaguan culture dates from about 550 C.E. – 1425 C.E. There are several more unexcavated sites like Tuzigoot along the Verde, including one about a quarter of a mile downriver from my house.[3]

The Sinaguan sites along the Verde were likely abandoned around 1200 C.E. The reason the sites were vacated is not clear. A period of severe drought is a reasonable guess.

Getting to the Point

This blog is about Sustainability. This post offers three examples, all within a few miles of my home that help clarify what Sustainability, in the Triple Bottom Line sense, is all about.

The Verde and its riparian zone >> I like to think of Common Wealth, that is, of worth held mutually by the inhabitants of some place or nation – or by humanity in general. This is a form of mutual inheritance that the current generation holds in trust for future generations. Each generation is entitled to the fruits of the Common Wealth, in return for protecting and extending the orchard.

Mining operations >> Early 20th century mining operations placed enormous stress on the environment, including waters like the Verde. The photographs are really striking. And the Verde, then as now, is a major water source for Phoenix, over a hundred miles downstream. Containing the effects of mining and industrial operations is a primary management responsibility, ethically as well as legally.

The Sinaguan people >> Apparently, the Sinaguan people lived along the Verde for several centuries. Then they left. The reason for their departure may well have been a collapse of the natural environment they depended on due to a prolonged drought.

This is a rather vivid illustration of the dependence of peoples and cultures on the natural environment. It applies to everybody. And it applies to human – generated pressures on the environment, as well as natural cyclic phenomena. The natural environment is your business – and your business’s business.


Chuck - Red RocksThoughtful comments and experience reports are always appreciated.

…  Chuck Harrington (Chuck@JeraSustainableDevelopment.com)

This blog and associated website (www.JeraSustainableDevelopment.com) are intended as a resource for smaller manufacturers in the pursuit of Sustainability. While editorial focus is on smaller manufacturers, all interested readers are welcome.


[1] For more on riparian green zones, see http://arizonaexperience.org/land/riparian-areas

[2] For more on the Little daisy mine and early 20th century copper mining, see http://azstateparks.com/Parks/JERO/

[3] “Sinagua” means “without water”. For more on the Sinaguan culture, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinagua

 

A Pathway to Performance Excellence

For an organization, the term “performance excellence” entails achieving relevant results – results that align with that organization’s view of what it is, why it exists and what it intends to achieve. Given well communicated clarity as to these basics — often expressed through statements on core values, vision and mission – it becomes possible to plot a coherent pathway to achieving outstanding results. A Clear Sense of Direction, a post to this blog from a year ago, outlines that pathway.   — C.H.


A Clear Sense of Directionfrom 5 September 2015

On Values, Vision and Mission

It has been my privilege to serve as a Baldrige – based performance excellence examiner in two states, and to serve on the Board of Overseers for the Arizona state program. National Baldrige performance excellence awards, along with their state – level counterparts, are based on written applications which respond to a comprehensive set of queries on an organization’s operating processes and practices, as well as corresponding outputs (results). Examiners are trained to seek a high degree of alignment within an applicant’s responses, tracing from statements on Core Values (who you are), Vision (the future you seek to create) and Mission (how you intend to pursue your Vision), through operating processes and practices, to demonstrated results.

In practice, however, statements on organizational Values, Vision and Mission are often little more than hype or platitudes. This is unfortunate, since earnest statements of Values, Vision and Mission provide a sense of direction and a basis for strategy, and execution for the entire organization.

Core Values [1]

Businesses awakened to the importance of core values almost twenty years ago, when Jim Collins’ and Jerry Porras’ Built to Last [2] was published. Since then, Built to Last has sold over a million copies. Built to Last sought to discover the factors that distinguished companies that enjoyed long (multi-generational) histories of sustained success by comparing clear successes with less successful rivals. The research methodology is both interesting and compelling. Bottom Line: the book’s major conclusion is that an emphasis on core values, cultivated throughout the organization’s culture, is a distinguishing hallmark of the successful companies studied. Guess what? A profusion of Values Statements ensued.

Core Values and Organizational Culture

I find it important to distinguish Values from Vision and Mission. Vision and Mission are strategic concepts regarding the organization’s approach to the marketplace. Both are situational and subject to prudent amendment as circumstances evolve. Core Values are, on the other hand, constitute “… the bedrock on which all foundations are built”.  Values reflect the beliefs of the defining senior leadership, often the organization’s founders — they are not determined democratically. Values, like solid rock, change slowly over time (earthquakes excepted, geological and organizational). Values are also restrictive, in that many of them amount to thou shalt nots [3].

Core values are foundational to the organization’s culture. The culture, in turn, defines the environment for execution. Execution means effective actions in alignment with direction. Strategic concepts provide direction.

Core values are likewise reflected in how the organization is perceived by others. This applies whether or not an organization’s values are publicized — or even recognized — within the organization. The values may be strong, or they may be weak — but they are there and they do matter.

Dr. David Hawkins provides some insight to this in his distinction between power and force [4]. Hawkins holds that individuals (and, by extension, organizations) can, due to strong core values, accrete a silent power that others find compelling. He likens this power to gravity: it is intangible and perceived only by its effects. Reasonably, this power is perceived as a virtue that the Romans called gravitas. Gravitas elicits respect, manifest as harmony within an organization and as credibility without. Harmony within supports execution. Credibility without provides an intangible boost in the marketplace — the marketplace for your goods and services, the marketplace for the talent you need, and the marketplace for the materials, services and supplies you buy.

The Vision Statement [5]

 Capture - Alice Excerpt

Stephen Covey taught a generation to “start with the end in mind” [6]. Better yet, start with a clear idea expressed clearly and communicated effectively. The Business Dictionary defines Vision Statement [7]  as:

“An aspirational description of what an organization would like to achieve or accomplish in the mid-term or long-term future. It is intended to serve as a clear guide for choosing current and future courses of action”.

Change “would like to” to something stronger — perhaps “intends to”, “commits to”, or, better yet, “will”. Limit your statement to a few memorable sentences. Be explicit about your time frame for realization — something like “by 2020” or “within five years”. Then you will have an outline for a useful Vision Statement, not just fluff or hype.

One example of a useful Vision Statement is that of Interface Corporation, the carpet manufacturer:

“To be the first company that, by its deeds, shows the world what sustainability is in all of its dimensions: people, process, product, place and profit — by 2020 — and, in doing so, become restorative through the power of influence.”

Interface’s Vision Statement spells out what they intend to accomplish and when they expect to do so. It is clear how this Vision Statement can lead to rational goals and quantifiable objectives. At last report, they are on schedule to make their 2020 commitment!

Mission Statement

The Business Dictionary defines “Mission Statement” as: [8]

“A written declaration of an organization’s core purpose and focus that normally remains unchanged over time. Properly crafted mission statements (1) serve as filters to separate what is important from what is not, (2) clearly state which markets will be served and how, and (3) communicate a sense of intended direction to the entire organization.”

“A mission is different from a vision in that the former is the cause and the latter is the effect; a mission is something to be accomplished whereas a vision is something to be pursued for that accomplishment.”

Take Green Soul Botanical’s Mission Statement as an example: [9]

“Green Soul Botanicals’ mission is to provide Spas, wellness professionals and fellow travelers on the path with unique herbal products that are effective, luxurious and natural without artifice. In doing so, Green Soul Botanicals operates in an ethical and responsible manner, while providing right livelihood for those associated. [10]

 As you can see, Green Soul’s mission statement specifies three target customer groups: Spas, wellness professionals and fellow travelers on the path (individuals that value the Spa lifestyle). The Mission Statement goes on to differentiate Green Soul’s products, its mode of operations and its responsibility to those engaged in the business. Consequently, the bases for constructing an executing a Business Model are in place.

The Pathway to Performance Excellence

Given a well communicated sense of direction, an organization can follow through by building a Business Model and setting a coherent set of goals and objectives that align with that sense of direction. Deploy those objectives throughout your organization and track those objectives through to relevant and measurable results:

Capture - Values to Results

 

Chuck at ReneThoughtful comments and experience reports are always appreciated.

 

…  Chuck Harrington

(Chuck@JeraSustainableDevelopment.com)

This blog and associated website (www.JeraSustainableDevelopment.com) are intended as a resource for smaller manufacturers in the pursuit of Sustainability. While editorial focus is on smaller manufacturers, all interested readers are welcome.


[1] The paragraphs on Core Values are borrowed from On Values Culture and Gravitas, this blog, 24 January 2013: http://jerasustainabledevelopment.com/2013/01/24/on-values-culture-and-gravitas/

[2] Jim Collins and Jerry Porras, Built to Last, HarperCollins (1994, 1997)

[3] Patrick Lencioni, Make Your Values Mean Something, Harvard Business Review (July 2002). This HBR Tool Kit article provides useful insights on core values.

[4] David R. Hawkins, M.D. Ph.D., Power vs Force, revised edition, Veritas Publishing (1995, 1998, 2004, 2012), especially Chapter 11

[5] The paragraphs on Vision are borrowed from Better Vision, this blog, 11 September 2014: http://jerasustainabledevelopment.com/2014/09/11/better-vision/

[6] Covey, Stephen, Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, Revised Edition, Free Press (2004)

[7] http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/vision-statement.html#ixzz2GT4tPgcN

[8] http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/mission-statement.html#ixzz3kRXauQKY

[9] For more on Green Soul Botanicals see The Green in Green Soul, this blog, http://jerasustainabledevelopment.com/2014/05/21/the-green-in-green-soul/

[10] “Right livelihood” is a Buddhist precept. “To practice right livelihood, you have to find a way to earn your living without transgressing your ideals of love and compassion. The way you support yourself can be an expression of your deepest self” — Thich Nhat Hanh, The Heart of the Buddha’s Teaching, Parallax Press (1998), p. 104, cited on-line at: http://buddhism.about.com/od/theeightfoldpath/a/rightlivelihood.htm

 

The People Puzzle – Part 2

Education and the Future

Robot businessman imageThis essay is Part 2 of The People Puzzle, a continuing discussion about finding (or creating) a future where “life is still good” for everyone, in the post – industrial economy. Part 1 of The People Puzzle presented a few of the pieces to this puzzle. Those pieces seemed to fall into three primary areas: demographic changes, advances in technology and education. In this essay, we look at education.

Part 1 offered three puzzle pieces especially related to education: (1) a report that over 99% of the 11.6 million jobs created (or recovered) by the U.S. economy in the years 2010 – 2015 went to people with t least some college education, (2) a question about what people whose jobs are eliminated by technology or economics should be re-educated to do, and (3) author Daniel Alpert’s contention that globalization has unleashed a hoard (literally billions) of under-educated people, all looking for a better life.

Here are two more puzzle pieces, all specific to education:

Girls and Boys >> The U.S. Department of Education has reported that 4 out of every 7 American college degree recipients in 2014 were female. [1]

The Cost of College >> The cost of attending college has skyrocketed. A CNBC report advises that tuition and fees in 2014 ran about $9,139 at public, four year schools, compared to less than $500 in 1971. The high cost of college has resulted in more than $1.2 trillion in student debt! [2]

Tomorrow’s Jobs Outlook [3]

This is how American workforce is employed now:

Farming, forestry and fishing –                                           0.7%

Manufacturing, mining, transportation and crafts –       20.3%

Managerial, professional and technical –                         37.3%

Sales and office –                                                                24.2%

Other services –                                                                  17.6%

Looking ahead to the next 35 years or so, it is difficult for me to imagine that employment in farming, forestry and fishing will increase. “Manufacturing, mining, and transportation” jobs will continue to be under heavy pressure from automation and lower wage workers elsewhere, as will “sales and office” jobs. Competition for “managerial, professional and technical” jobs will continue to increase globally as emerging economies produce more and more educated people (South Korea, for example). “Other services” jobs should be OK, to the extent that they serve protected niche markets (hair stylists, for example, serve a local customer base).

Putting the Pieces Together

It seems clear enough to me that tomorrow’s personal occupations are similar to today’s businesses, to the extent that differentiated talents, know-how and skill sets are increasingly necessary. It is education’s task to prepare an entire population for the employment that the emerging 21st century global economy demands.

For the U.S., that means rethinking education from first principles. America’s educational systems have evolved from providing basic literacy for everyone to primary and secondary education for almost everyone. 21st century occupations will require highly individualized – and highly relevant – primary, secondary and tertiary education (or skills acquisition training) on a continuous, life-long basis for everyone, all provided at a much lower cost to those being educated (or trained). Emerging technology will need to play an important role. Existing educational institutions will face extensive change or, in many cases, extinction. Fierce and persistent resistance to the necessary changes can be expected, if not guaranteed.


In Monet's GardenThoughtful comments and ideas on the structure and content of occupations – oriented 21st century education are invited and appreciated.

…  Chuck Harrington

(Chuck@JeraSustainableDevelopment.com)

This blog and associated website (www.JeraSustainableDevelopment.com) are intended as a resource for smaller manufacturers in the pursuit of Sustainability. While editorial focus is on smaller manufacturers, all interested readers are welcome.

Image: Robot and Puzzle – licensed through www.dreamstime.com


[1] https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d15/tables/dt15_301.10.asp?current=ye

[2] http://www.cnbc.com/2015/06/16/why-college-costs-are-so-high-and-rising.html

[3] CIA World Factbook, www.cia.gov (yes, that CIA). Figures are from 2009, the latest available. Should be close enough for our purposes here.

 

The People Puzzle

A Master Plan

“… so that we can imagine far into the future and life is still good. That’s what ‘sustainable’ means. It’s not some silly hippy thing – it matters for everyone.”

That’s how Elon Musk defines “sustainable” in Tesla’s recently released Master Plan, Part Deux. [1] The Master Plan goes on to outline Tesla’s approach to making a sustainable (solar) energy economy a reality. A solar powered economy is a key component of a future where “life is still good” – for everyone. But it is only one component. This post looks at another component – the future of employment, meaning how people might produce their livelihoods as the future unfolds over the coming decades.

Pieces of a Puzzle

Robot businessman imageUntil the middle of the 19th century, the great majority of Americans worked in agriculture. Then, the advent of railroads and the American Civil War marked a profound change — from a nation of farmers to a nation of industrial workers. A couple of decades more than a century later, the smoke stacks stopped belching and America began morphing, then rushing, toward a post – industrial economy, whatever “post – industrial economy” means for the American workforce.

Frankly, “post – industrial economy” isn’t very well defined, especially from the perspective of the millions of diverse individuals that constitute the American workforce – all of whom want a “future where life is still good”. While that future is far from clear, there are some pieces that, like a jigsaw puzzle, can be examined and fit together.

Here are a few of those pieces:

>> The Age of Oversupply: Daniel Alpert’s 2013 book, The Age of Oversupply, posits that the economic emergence of formerly iron curtain countries and of export oriented Asian countries has resulted in a global glut (billions!) of under-educated workers and of capital looking for higher returns.

>> Demographics: There are dramatic changes evident in the demographics of economically developed countries, including the U.S. Birth rates are declining and populations are aging. In Japan and a few western European countries, populations are actually shrinking. Changes of this magnitude have significant social, economic and political repercussions.

>> Jobs and Education: A recent Bloomberg article entitled Educated Americans have taken almost every job created in the recovery [2] maintains that the U.S. economy has added (or recovered) about 11.6 million jobs since 2010. Of these, about 99% of those jobs were filled by people with at least some college education. Only 80,000 – less than 1% — were filled by people with a high school diploma or less. (Note: The population of the U.S. increased by about 12.3 million between 2010 and 2015).

>> Coal Miners and Re-education: There has been much talk about the demise of coal as a fuel. Of course, that means displacement for those who make their living in the coal mining industry. Re-education comes up frequently. Exactly what these people might be retrained to do does not come up so often.

>> Poorer Kids: A recent McKinsey & Company article informs us that:

“Most people growing up in advanced economies since World War II have been able to assume they will be better off than their parents. For much of the time, that assumption proved correct: except for a brief hiatus in the 1970s, buoyant global economic and employment growth over the past 70 years saw all households experience rising incomes, both before and after taxes and transfers. As recently as between 1993 and 2005, all but 2% of households in 25 advanced economies saw real incomes rise.”

“Yet this overwhelmingly positive income trend has ended. A new McKinsey Global Institute report, Poorer than their parents? Flat or falling incomes in advanced economies [3] finds that between 2005 and 2014, real incomes in those same advanced economies were flat or fell for 65 to 70 percent of households, or more than 540 million people.”

>> Robotics and Automation: Tesla’s Master Plan, Part Deux, mentioned earlier, provides other insights on employment and the future. The Master Plan suggests that advanced manufacturing techniques could accelerate production rates between 5 and 10 times on a roughly 2 year iteration cycle. That means many more vehicles per employee. The Master Plan also mentions vehicles without drivers.

Closer to home, my local grocery and hardware stores are installing more self – checkout aisles. The bank that I use now has ATMs inside as well as outside. Retail stores (and their employees) are being thumped by on-line shopping. The beat goes on.

Robotics and automation, fueled by advances in artificial intelligence, are proliferating rapidly. Good for product costs and (presumably) prices. Not so good for people needing jobs.


What Next?

This essay is about finding (or creating) a future where “life is still good” for everyone, in a post – industrial economy. What that entails is, indeed, a puzzle. The few pieces of that puzzle mentioned here seem to fall into three areas: demographic changes, advances in technology and education. The next post to this blog, The People Puzzle – Part 2, will begin to fit together the pieces of this puzzle and attempt to draw some insights as to what that future where “life is still good” might consist of. Stay tuned.

Chuck - VancouverThoughtful comments and experience reports are always appreciated.

…  Chuck Harrington

(Chuck@JeraSustainableDevelopment.com)

This blog and associated website (www.JeraSustainableDevelopment.com) are intended as a resource for smaller manufacturers in the pursuit of Sustainability. While editorial focus is on smaller manufacturers, all interested readers are welcome.

Image credit: robot / puzzle graphic via www.dreamstime.com


[1] https://www.tesla.com/blog/master-plan-part-deux

[2] www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-30/americans-with-more-education-have-taken-almost-every-job-created-in-the-recovery

[3] www.mckinsey.com/global-themes/employment-and-growth/poorer-than-their-parents-a-new-perspective-on-inome-inequality

Energy Notes from the EIA

The Energy Information Administration (EIA)

The EIA, part of the U.S. Government, compiles and projects statistical data on energy production and consumption. Among the EIA’s many regular publications, the Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) and the International Energy Outlook (IEO) are probably the most comprehensive. The 2016 editions of both publications have recently become available (for free). This post draws on both.

Both publications project data out to 2040. The basic set of projections is labeled the “reference case”. The reference case is a “business as usual” case that projects current trends in view of government demographic projections (like population projections), financial projections (like GDP and inflation rates) and laws / regulations already in place. The reference case does not anticipate technical break-throughs, other than those necessary to meet established laws or regulations. For example, the reference case projects that new automobiles will meet the fuel consumption levels required by the existing C.A.F.E. regulations in the years to 2025, never mind how, technically, that is accomplished.

Fueling Our Past – and Future

Energy Consumption in the US

The graph labeled “Energy Consumption in the United States (1776-2040)” is from the home page of the EIA’s website (www.eia.gov).  Comments:

>> Energy consumption is measured in quadrillion BTUs (“Quads”). One quad is a heck of a lot of energy. As the graph indicates, all of the hydroelectric dams in the U.S., taken together, produce only about 3 Quads annually. Over recent years, the total energy consumption in the U.S. has been around 100 Quads per year.

>> As you can see, the AEO 2016 reference case projects that, over the next 25 years, about 12 Quads of energy from coal will be replaced with an almost equal amount of energy from natural gas. This would cut the use of coal as fuel in this country by about half between now and 2040.

>> Energy production from petroleum is projected to remain almost constant through 2040.

>> Renewable energy (“other renewables”), especially solar energy, is projected to increase rapidly, to almost 10 Quads by 2040. Still, 10 Quads are projected to be less than 10% of the U.S. total energy consumption in 2040.

Energy Consumption Trends

The green line on the graph labeled “Total Energy” projects that total energy consumption in the U.S. will increase slowly between now and 2040. Total energy production (blue line), however, is projected to increase somewhat faster. That means that the U.S. will swing from being a net importer of energy to becoming a net exporter of energy about ten years from now. This, if it happens, will be great news.

US Energy Balance

In my view, the America’s chronic international trade deficit in petroleum has been a huge burden on the U.S. economy. The improvement in U.S. petroleum production rates over the last few years has dramatically lowered world petroleum prices. Those lower prices have resulted in many fewer U.S. dollars going abroad to pay for fuel, and in a nice chunk of change for everybody with every tank full. Moreover, I regard these improvements as the major causal factor in the recovery (such as it is) in the U.S. economy over the last two years.

But wait, there’s more. America’s international relations and foreign policies over the last several decades have been excessively influenced by the need to assure safe access to imported energy, especially petroleum.

So, better global and domestic economics, plus considerably more latitude in foreign relations (including military affairs) – would be great news indeed for America!

Carbon Dioxide Emissions

Carbon Dioxide Emissions Projections

Concerns about global warming / climate change / carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions have been at the forefront of Sustainability issues in recent years. This graph uses figures from the IEO to project reference case annual carbon dioxide emissions through 2040. As you can see, carbon dioxide emissions are projected to rise over the coming years.

 This is in sharp contradiction to almost everything we hear from the media and elsewhere. To be clear: given the “business as usual” conditions upon which the reference case is constructed, carbon dioxide emissions are not going to decline in the coming years. Net reductions in CO2 emissions will require significant changes in policies and / or technologies, in the U.S. and in the rest of the world.


Chuck at the Pacific

 

 

Thoughtful comments and experience reports are always appreciated.

…  Chuck Harrington

(Chuck@JeraSustainableDevelopment.com)

This blog and associated website (www.JeraSustainableDevelopment.com) are intended as a resource for smaller manufacturers in the pursuit of Sustainability. While editorial focus is on smaller manufacturers, all interested readers are welcome.

 

Manufacturing in 21st Century America

The global economy, which includes the U.S. and its manufacturers, is in a whirlwind of transformational change. The scope and dimensions of this is difficult to grasp. We’re Not in the 20th Century Anymore, Toto, a post to this blog from a year ago, offers some thoughts on where to start. … C.H.


We’re Not in the 20th Century Anymore, Toto – from 1 May 2015

An Emerging View of Manufacturing in the 21st Century

Dreamstime - Crystal BallThe Industrial Age in America – a time in which the mass production of goods provided the economic focus of the country – declined during the final decades of the 20th century and swooned as the 21st century began. This isn’t a cyclic matter: 20th century manufacturing isn’t going to come back. Instead, the end of the Industrial Age in America is part of a transformation that is as sweeping as the Industrial Revolution was, when industry replaced agriculture as this nation’s economic focus.

Keep in mind that, in 1870, 70% – 80% of America’s working population was employed in agriculture. As of 2008, less than 2% was directly employed in agriculture. [1] Never the less, America’s farms today produce much more than ever before. America will continue to manufacture tangible products – lots of them. The way that America manufactures those products will change as dramatically as farming has changed.

“… right now we are going through a once-in-a-century transformation in business that is throwing out all of the existing rules.” [2]

This transformation is powered by a confluence of potent change agents, which might be loosely grouped as Globalization, Sustainability, Technology and Demographics & Trends. Globalization, Sustainability and Demographics & Trends provide insights as to the rapidly expanding context within which even quite small manufacturers must operate. Technology provides the means for transformation.

A few thoughts on the globalized context within 21st century manufacturers must operate:

>> Competition – Competitors and potential competitors exist worldwide, with more coming every day. So do suppliers and potential suppliers. Likewise, customers and potential customers. And these competitors / suppliers / customers are quickly becoming increasingly sophisticated in all aspects of globalized business.

>> Population – Since the advent of truly viable birth control, birth rates have dropped significantly, especially in economically developed nations. As a result, populations are aging. At the same time, the participation on women in all aspects of commerce has increased dramatically. Per capita GDP is increasing, notably in developing countries, resulting in more global middle class buying power.

>> Commerce is global / Politics are local – While competition is global, governments everywhere have incentive to favor their own. Issues including jobs, access to resources, taxation, entitlements and property rights continue to be contentious.

>> Financial System – The global financial system, as it exists today, is a hodge-podge of remnants from the Bretton Woods accords, socialist notions from the soviet era as well as from western nations, fiat (rather than hard) currencies, instantaneous globalized trading in currencies and financial derivatives, not to mention a diverse array of banking institutions. All of this is hardly a recipe for international financial stability.

Some thoughts on 21st century manufacturing operations:

Atomic physicist Niels Bohr once said that “prediction is very difficult, especially about the future”.  Actually, it’s the being correct part that is difficult. The following are extrapolations from American manufacturing’s current situation. We’ll all see what actually happens as the 21st century unfolds.

>> Products: To beg the obvious, labor related costs in economically developed countries are much higher than in less developed countries. To be globally competitive, products manufactured in developed countries will require significantly greater intangible aspects, as opposed to the simply tangible. Above all, products need be clearly differentiable.

>> Emphasis on Return on Capital Employed (RoCE): Manufacturing is capital intensive, especially concerning fixed assets, when compared to other modes of enterprise. Accordingly, financial viability depends on sustainable RoCE, taken across the business cycle, rather than on profits per se. This change in point of view fosters longer term thinking in many respects. Organizational structure and financing are not least of these.

>> The Electro-Mechanical Spectrum: A recent essay [3] discussed a trend in machinery from the mechanical to the electronic. The Tesla automobile serves as a familiar example. Unmanned space vehicles offer another. The more electronic machines offer obvious advantages, including reliability and Moore’s Law initial costs. Perhaps the most important advantage is that electronic machines have a significant software component. For this reason, machines can be improved, or even retasked, through software changes. Such machines can actually improve over time, rather than just depreciate.

>> Innovation: There is nothing static about the future. 21st century manufacturers must consistently offer differentiable products that please customers while generating satisfactory returns. This requires continuous and systematic innovation in products, operating processes and, especially, business models. A prior essay looks at all three of these modes of innovation. [4]


There is a lot more to manufacturing in the 21st century than a single essay can even hint at. The changes involved in this “once-in-a-century transformation” are of almost seismic magnitude. And change will beget more change, even more rapidly. Stand by.

Chuck ReadingThoughtful comments and experience reports are always appreciated.

…  Chuck Harrington

(Chuck@JeraSustainableDevelopment.com)

This blog and associated website (www.JeraSustainableDevelopment.com) are intended as a resource for smaller manufacturers in the pursuit of Sustainability. While editorial focus is on smaller manufacturers, all interested readers are welcome. New blog posts are published weekly.

Photo Credit: © Shutter999 | Dreamstime.comCrystal Ball With A Bar Chart Photo


[1] Figures from Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_the_United_States

[2] Tien Tzuo, CEO of Zuora, quoted in Fortune magazine. http://fortune.com/2015/04/27/tien-tzuo-starting-your-own-business/. Zuora is a start-up business that is pioneering subscription based business models. For more on Zuora, see www.Zuora.com.

[3] http://jerasustainabledevelopment.com/2014/11/15/the-electro-mechanical-spectrum/

[4] http://jerasustainabledevelopment.com/2014/11/29/three-modes-of-innovation/

 

 

Whither Sustainability?

Sustainability

Sustainability, as that term applies to manufacturing, owes its origin to Limits to Growth, [1] which was published in 1972. Limits to Growth describes a systems 3P Graphicanalysis of trends in the earth’s population, industrialization, pollution, food production and resource depletion, with projections into the future. In essence, Limits to Growth emphasized that humanity’s increasing demands for economic development are overwhelming the natural world, and that industry is the primary agent for doing so. So begins the quest for sustainable economic growth and for the technology and practices that enables economic development without destroying the natural world upon which all of us rely.

Mission Zero

In 1994, some customers were asking Interface Corporation, a manufacturer of carpet tiles, about Interface’s vision regarding the environment. Ray Anderson, founder and CEO of Interface Corporation, recognized that the usual response – that Interface was in full compliance with all applicable environmental laws – just wasn’t good enough. His response was to redirect his billion dollar company toward a goal of zero environmental impact.

“I wanted Interface, a company so oil intensive that you could think of it as an extension of the petrochemical industry, to be the first enterprise in history to be truly sustainable – to shut down its smokestacks, close off its effluent pipes, to do no harm to the environment, and to take nothing from the earth not easily renewed by the earth.” [2]

Moreover, Ray Anderson proposed to accomplish this by the year 2020, and to make a profit while doing so. Consequently, Interface established a system of yearly milestone objectives toward Anderson’s vision. Today, 20 – odd years later, Interface remains roughly on course.

Climate Take Back

However, the recent global financial crisis severely impacted the construction industry, Interface’s primary market. In 2011, Ray Anderson passed away. As a result of hard economic times and the loss of their visionary leader and founder, Interface lost some of their some of its edge. The direction continued, but the audaciousness faded.

Now, Interface is renewing its initiative by redefining what Sustainability means in industry. Interface’s new mission — Climate Take Back – builds on and goes beyond Mission Zero’s “do no harm” initiatives: Climate Take Back is proactive. Climate Take Back includes four bold commitments:

>> To bring carbon home and reverse climate change – That is, to remove carbon compounds already present in the atmosphere.

>> To create supply chains that benefit all life – That is, to insist on proactivity from entire supply chains.

>> To make factories that are like forests – That is, to create manufacturing processes and entire factories that mimic nature.

>> To transform dispersed materials into products and goodness – That is, to recover and reuse widely dispersed refuse materials on a global scale.

On 6 June 2016, Joel Makower of GreenBiz published an insightful article on Interface’s new initiatives. It is well worth reading for anyone interested in both manufacturing and sustainability, and well worth careful study for those who want to make a difference.

Here is the link:

https://www.greenbiz.com/article/inside-interfaces-bold-new-mission-achieve-climate-take-back

For Smaller Manufacturers

Interface has long been a champion of, and roll model for, Sustainability in manufacturing. The switch from “do no harm” to “make the world a better place” significantly raises the bar. Beyond that, Interface’s actions and corresponding results dramatically demonstrate the power of visionary leadership.

Chuck - Red RocksThoughtful comments and experience reports are always appreciated.

…  Chuck Harrington

(Chuck@JeraSustainableDevelopment.com)

This blog and associated website (www.JeraSustainableDevelopment.com) are intended as a resource for smaller manufacturers in the pursuit of Sustainability. While editorial focus is on smaller manufacturers, all interested readers are welcome. New blog posts are published weekly.


[1] Donella (“Dana”) Meadows, et al, Limits to Growth, Signet Books (1972)

[2] To learn more about Ray Anderson and Interface, Ray’s book is a good read:

Ray C. Anderson, Confessions of a Radical Industrialist, St. Martins Press (2009)

Solar Energy’s Solstice Problem

The Global Solar Power Explosion

By any count, solar electric generation is a huge success. Solar cells, like the ones on the roof of my house, are being installed in accelerating numbers by residences, public buildings, commercial facilities, industries and electric power utilities around the world. The cost of solar installations continues to decline, while environmental concerns affect the operational viability of existing fossil fueled electricity generation.

AEO 2016 ER Solar Power GenerationThe graph to the right, from the U.S. Department of Energy, [1] projects that solar generation capacity will increase by about ten times from 2015 to 2040, without considering any new technology, laws, regulations or other factors that may well accelerate the rate of solar installation further over the coming years. Solar power generation capacity in countries other than the U.S. – including less economically developed countries – is likewise increasing.

Closer to Home

My Home Viewed from Space

My home, as viewed from Space

My home is in the high desert of central Arizona, about as far north as Los Angeles or Atlanta. Climate here is sunny and dry almost year around – almost optimal for solar power. Here is a Google Earth picture of my house, as seen by a satellite. The solar panels, which you can see in the picture, have been in service for three years now.  My solar power system has on-line data collection, so I now have some pretty reliable performance numbers.

The graph below, from my actual experience, demonstrates solar’s “solstice problem”. The blue curve indicates the total electric power consumed at my house, by month. The red curve indicates the amount of solar electric power generated at my house, by month. The green curve indicates the net amount of electricity I purchase from my local electric power utility, again by month.

Home Solar Power Graph

My solar power system is designed to produce 70% of my electric requirements, taken over a full year (which it does). However, as the blue curve indicates, my total power consumption varies widely from month to month, with strong peaks in mid-summer (air conditioning) and mid-winter (electric heating).

However, my solar power generation (red curve) also varies strongly from month to month, with high peaks during the long days of mid-summer and low peaks during the short days of mid-winter.  As you can see, my solar system produces about half as much power in mid-winter months as it does in mid-summer months, near the solstices.

The Solstice Problem

To appreciate the impact of the solstice problem, it is useful to zoom out from considering a single solar installation (like my house) to thinking from the perspective of a power utility or the perspective of the power grids. Solar power is going to continue to grow as a fraction of total electric generating capacity. But, solar power facilities only generate electricity while the sun shines. At the same time, residential customers like me and you, as well as commercial and industrial customers, expect all of the power they need to be available whenever they need it.

Obviously, the sun doesn’t shine at night. But nights only last a few hours. Batteries and other technologies are available to manage the overnight problem. The solstice problem – generating capacity varies dramatically over weeks and months from solstice to solstice – is another matter. The solstice problem is just that – a problem that needs to be solved for solar energy to become truly practical on a massive scale. There are lots of possible avenues toward a solution, or sets of solutions for different geographic areas. These avenues might include demand management and innovative large scale energy storage technologies. Or, there may be approaches that nobody has thought of yet.

For Smaller Manufacturers

The electric power industry is in a state of transition. Manufacturers, especially those with substantial electric power requirements, need to remain aware of your utility’s situation and your own options. You might consider producing some or all of your own power (solar, of course). In any case, develop and maintain an on-going rapport with your utility’s customer service engineers.

Thoughtful comments and experience reports are always appreciated.

…  Chuck Harrington

(Chuck@JeraSustainableDevelopment.com)

This blog and associated website (www.JeraSustainableDevelopment.com) are intended as a resource for smaller manufacturers in the pursuit of Sustainability. While editorial focus is on smaller manufacturers, all interested readers are welcome. New blog posts are published weekly.


[1] This graph is from Energy Information Administration’s Annual Energy Outlook 2016, Early Edition, published 17 May 2016. Available for free download at: http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/er/index.cfm

 

The Next Killer App – Part 2

“Killer App”?

“Killer App” is a computer industry term. It refers to the software that creates the value that makes people buy the hardware – lots of hardware. In this post, I use “killer app” rather loosely, to mean a whole genre of software that breathes life into new hardware platforms.

The Next Killer App – Part 1 reprised the idea of an electro – mechanical continuum in equipment design. As design emphasis moves past electric to electronic, software becomes increasingly important, such that the equipment increasingly becomes a means by which the software creates value. That’s why I think that the next killer app will be will be electric automobiles, and the value that sells them will lie in safety, convenience, comfort, efficiency and entertainment.

 Electric Vehicles: Why?

The global vehicle industry has been evolving rather slowly since about the year 1900. The rate of evolution has accelerated in the last few decades, such that today’s vehicles powered by internal combustion engines are remarkable machines by almost any measure. Today, however, there is a convergence of technical and social factors that make electric vehicles much more desirable – so much so that electric vehicles may well become our vehicles of choice over the next few decades. Here are a few of those “technical and social factors”:

>> There are persistent concerns with importing and burning huge quantities of petroleum every year. These concerns include a pernicious deficit in America’s international balance of trade figures and accumulating levels of atmospheric pollutants from combustion.

>> Highway safety figures have improved significantly over the years, even while the number of miles driven has increased. Still, 32,675 people died in vehicle accidents on American roads in 2014. Compare that to commercial airline figures, which are consistently near zero, never mind travelling 500+ miles an hour, six miles straight up.

1903 Studebaker Electric

Thomas Edison in 1903 Studebaker Electric Automobile

>> Battery and electric drive technology has improved dramatically, especially over the last decade or so, vastly improving an idea – electric automobiles – that is as old as the automobile industry itself. (Mrs. Henry Ford is said to have owned an electric car).

Fifty years ago, a newspaper ad for a used car might read something like “1956 Dodge 4 door sedan, 48,000 miles, excellent condition, R&H” The “R&H” meant radio and heater, which were extra cost options. Since then, add automatic transmissions, air conditioning, power steering, seat belts, fuel injection, stereo entertainment systems, GPS and more. The long term trend in the features that people want badly enough to pay for is clear enough.

Tesla Leads a Revolution

Tesla Motors, of course, is current leader in electric vehicles. Their cars define the current state of the art. But Tesla isn’t just about spiffy new cars. Tesla has stated that their intention is to lead a revolution – a revolution in how we think about transportation. Tesla recognizes that it needs to create an electric vehicle industry for electric vehicles to become more than a side show in the very large global vehicle circus.[1]  To that end, Tesla opened its considerable cache of patents, license and royalty free, to any firm that seriously attempts to build electric vehicles.

Tesla Model SFurther, Tesla hasn’t shied from confronting the external barriers to the general acceptability of electric vehicles. For example, Tesla continues to construct what is already an impressive number of electric vehicle recharging locations in the U.S. and elsewhere. Also, in July of this year, Tesla will hold the Grand Opening of a huge gigafactory which will produce the vast number of lithium ion batteries that Tesla expects to require (on the hurry-up).

The Business Model Continuum

The 360,000+ orders Tesla booked in a few weeks for their new Model 3 confirmed that demand for vehicles like Tesla’s does indeed exist. That’s good, because over a dozen serious prospective mass market electric vehicle manufacturers have already emerged globally. At least initially, there appears to be a continuum in the approaches these firms take toward electric vehicles. On one extreme, some existing global vehicle manufacturers seem to regard electric vehicles as a line extension, as hybrid vehicles are. I call this the Detroit view, although Nissan may prove to be the best example. Toward the other extreme, Tesla represents what I call the San Jose view, where the vehicle is viewed as a conduit for technology that provides new value in transportation.

Here are some examples:

>> Faraday Future has broken ground for a $1 billion manufacturing facility near Las Vegas where “we are eager to start production of the vehicles of the future that will embrace the increasingly intrinsic relationship between technology and mobility.” Like Tesla, Faraday Future is headquartered in Silicon Valley (physically and in mindset). Their initial products are expected to be high performance premium vehicles. Any firm that invests a billion dollars in a grass roots manufacturing facility is worth taking seriously. The firm is reported to be closely linked to the Chinese equivalent of Net Flix.[2]

>> There have been strong rumors of a coming electric vehicle from Apple (yes, that Apple). Apple has spent about $5 billion in additional R&D from 2013 to 2015, which, along with a $1 billion investment in a Chinese ride sharing service, suggests that Apple has a strong interest in shared mobility, expressed through shared, rather than owned vehicles. Driverless vehicles might well provide a new vessel for Apple software functionality, as Apple’s iPhone provides a vessel for personal communications software technology. It is interesting that Apple does not manufacture iPhones, or anything else that I know of. It is reasonable to suppose that an Apple car will be designed by Apple but built by somebody else.

>> There was a recent ad in the Phoenix newspaper for a Manager for Google’s driverless car operations in the Phoenix area. Google’s cute driverless vehicles are being widely road tested (more than 1.5 million self driving miles to date).[3] Google has been working on self driving cars since 2009, so now has a lot of experience with the necessary software. It seems likely that Google will partner with established automakers to provide self driving technology, rather than building their own vehicles.

>> The June 2016 issue of Fast Company magazine lists Mark Fields as #13 in its ranking of the 100 most creative people in business in 2016. Mark Fields is the President and CEO of Ford. Fast Company is not the sort of publication that normally associates “creative” with Detroit executives. The brief Fast Company listing notes that Ford has been conducting extensive road testing on driverless vehicles. Fields is quoting as wanting driverless technology for mass market vehicles that is “true to (Ford’s) brand”.

Incidentally, Ford recently announced a coming electric version of the mid-sized Ford Fusion model, featuring a 200 mile range. Sounds like a line extension to me. So, maybe Ford is still closer to Detroit than to Silicon Valley.

For Smaller Manufacturers

The automotive industry is obviously in a state of transition, perhaps disruptive transition. A lot of new competition is coming on several fronts. In situations like this, existing supplier relations are at risk. Bad, if you are an incumbent supplier. Not so bad if you have been on the outside, looking in. Better yet, there is room for new faces and new ideas as the distance between Detroit and Silicon Valley diminishes.

Chuck - VancouverThoughtful comments and experience reports are always appreciated.

 

…  Chuck Harrington

(Chuck@JeraSustainableDevelopment.com)

This blog and associated website (www.JeraSustainableDevelopment.com) are intended as a resource for smaller manufacturers in the pursuit of Sustainability. While editorial focus is on smaller manufacturers, all interested readers are welcome. New blog posts are published weekly. 


[1] How big is that “very large global vehicle circus”? Statista reports over 72 million vehicles sold in 2015, while projecting 100 million for 2020! http://www.statista.com/statistics/200002/international-car-sales-since-1990/

[2] For more on Faraday Future, see www.ff.com

[3] Google offers a video on its driverless prototypes at: https://www.google.com/selfdrivingcar/

 

 

The Next Killer App – Part 1

“Killer App”?

“Killer App” is a computer industry term. It refers to the software that creates the value that makes people buy the hardware – lots of hardware. In this post, I use “killer app” rather loosely, to mean a whole genre of software that breathes life into new hardware platforms.

Seventy-five years ago, the “killer app” was military software, such as code breaking, that financed the first truly digital computers. Today, it is social media and entertainment software that powers smart phone sales. Tomorrow, look for safety, efficiency and entertainment software that sells electric automobiles – especially electric vehicles that drive themselves.

This post – part 1 of 2 – reviews the idea of an electro – mechanical continuum in equipment design. This provides background for a discussion of electric vehicles and their consequences The Next Killer App – Part 2, next week.


The Electro – Mechanical Spectrum – From 15 November 2014

The Evolution of Machinery

Four Change DriversIt is increasingly clear — if not painfully clear — to most manufacturers that those who cannot embrace change are ill-prepared for the realities of operating in the 21st century. Manufacturers today face a convergence of many change drivers, which this blog rather arbitrarily groups as Globalization, Sustainability, Technology, and Demographics & Trends. To further complicate matters, some change drivers interact with others. Some emerge seemingly instantaneously, like 3D printing. Others reflect a trend over time.

This post looks at a trend in machinery, from almost entirely mechanical to extensively electrical (or electronic). One can imagine a continuum with mechanical devices at one extreme and electrical (or electronic) devices at the other.

As a familiar example, consider a continuum with a fine mechanical wrist watch at one extreme and the Apple Watch,[1] which was recently announced for 2015, at the other. It is easy to see a trend over time from pure mechanical watches to Bulova’s Accutron (electric tuning fork) watch, to quartz crystal watches, to all digital watches, to digital watches that keep time and do an increasing number of other things as well. In my view, the tipping point – the point where watches became more electrical than mechanical – fell between quartz watches with analog faces and hands, and quartz watches with digital displays.

Automobiles provide another example. Early cars were mechanical devices. They made little use of electricity, other than firing spark plugs – a hand crank started the engine. Electrification increased over the years to include lights, starter motors, electric windshield wipers, seat warmers and so on. Almost all of today’s cars make extensive use of electric power and computerization.

The Tesla Model S automobile may be close to a tipping point. Electric motor(s) propel the car — there is no combustion engine. Almost everything else is electric (or electronic) as well. Computers extensively monitor and regulate internal functioning and performance. The latest version of the Model S has two drive motors and all-wheel drive. The performance monitoring and feed-back in distributing power to the wheels is such that the much more powerful two motor version draws less current than the single motor version, extending – rather than reducing — the effective range between battery charges. The Model S also comes equipped with collision avoidance radar and sonar devices which also feed autopilot capabilities, not unlike a commercial airliner.

In the Factory

Equipment used in manufacturing isn’t exempt from this trend in technology. Newer machinery almost always makes more use of electricity and electronics than the machinery it replaced. Increased electrification (especially electronics-fication) improves the reliability and efficiency of the machine itself. It also improves the consistency of the products the machine produces.

Even more important, the information generated can be used outside the equipment in a multitude of useful ways – equipment maintenance, production throughput, energy consumption and materials utilization come quickly to mind. So, there are two advantages: (a) monitoring, feedback and corrective actions within the machine itself, and (b) information collection, analysis and utilization of the same information outside of the machine. Information collection can be through an industrial network, or through the internet.[2]

Production information available through the internet – the Internet of Things – is fraught with possibilities – multi-plant operations, remote maintenance, customer service and interfacing with transportation, for starters. When your firm’s products include “smart” internet accessible capability, the potential for adding value mushrooms.

This isn’t all smoke and mirrors. A McKinsey Global Institute report[3] projects that the Internet of Things will produce $0.9 trillion to $2.3 trillion in annual economic impact to manufacturers globally by 2025. Further, the McKinsey report projects that 80% – 100% of all manufacturers will be affected.

For Smaller Manufacturers

The evolution of machinery presents serious areas for concern for smaller manufacturers. Manufacturers that take advantage of this technology can expect significant gains in internal operating efficiency and in customer – facing areas. Smaller manufacturers, as a group, already lag larger manufacturers in productivity.[4] Smaller manufacturers, as a group, are less likely to have the technical capabilities necessary to exploit this technology. Smaller manufacturers, as a group, also find capital to be more expensive and harder to access than do larger firms.

These are serious concerns. Smaller manufacturers can address them by: (a) understanding and appreciating the disruptive potential for this technology within their industry, (b) continuing to focus their business, and (c) building joint actions with equipment suppliers, through trade associations, through technical societies and with customers.

Chuck - Austrian AlpsThoughtful comments and experience reports are always appreciated.

…  Chuck Harrington (Chuck@JeraSustainableDevelopment.com)

P.S: Contact me when your organization is serious about confronting the realities of 21st century manufacturing … CH

This blog and associated website (www.JeraSustainableDevelopment.com) are intended as a resource for smaller manufacturers in the pursuit of Sustainability. While editorial focus is on smaller manufacturers, all interested readers are welcome. New blog posts are published weekly.


[1] If you are curious about the Apple Watch, see http://www.apple.com/watch/films/#film-design

[2] For more on connected machines and products, see Smart Connected Products, a recent report from Oxford economics: http://www.ptc.com/File%20Library/Topics/Smart%20Connected%20Products/Oxford-Economics_Smart-Connected-Products-Report.pdf?l9=EN&src=Button&utm_campaign=SCP%20IoT%20SCP%20Oxford%20Report%20%e2%80%93%20IT%20B&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Eloqua

[3] See Disruptive Technologies: Advances that will transform life, business and the global economy, http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/business_technology/disruptive_technologies

[4] For more on the productivity gap between larger manufacturers and smaller, see Confronting the Productivity Gap, this blog, http://jerasustainabledevelopment.com/2012/11/29/confronting-the-productivity-gap/