OPINION: Making and keeping manufacturing great in South Carolina

We all want it, here it is — the recipe of how to make manufacturing great again, and to keep it great.

The world is spinning around — thankfully — but we are not talking about the physical phenomena, but rather by how the economic cycle influences almost everyone’s personal lives. It used to be hard to explain supply chain issues, dependencies and how connected human lives are around the world. Nowadays, COVID gave a crash course to everyone. Fortunately – or unfortunately — it suffices to say baby formula or toilet paper, and then your 90-year-old neighbor can detail to you how fragile the supply chain is when faced with unpredictability.

But then, there are solutions — albeit inconvenient — to these issues, and they will not really drastically influence lives. But what happens when we talk about certain dangerous facts, such as API (Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients) that are the foundation for much needed medicine or critical minerals needed for defense capabilities? What if we address the economic drawbacks of having your economy fragile and not dependent on solid grounds: manufacturing.

Let us start with the fundamental problem: the future workforce.

There is a hybrid warfare on the future workforce. I hold four engineering degrees including a PhD and it was/is a struggle to explain to my kids how irrelevant it is being trapped into a little screen, and the influence it will have on their careers. Kids dream of doing nutrition videos showing their physical enhancements and/or repeating dance moves like their life depends on it. This future workforce puts us two generations away from being irrelevant and losing our position as an economic powerhouse. It was the sheer production ability of the U.S. that made the allies win the last World War. It will not be different next time; well, it will be, but we will address it later in this article.

So how do we overcome this short attention span of the future generation that is supposed to lead us? Heavy investment in the whole education system. Yes, we might see an attack on the college system and claims that “college is a scam.” Whatever some folks might think, the fundamental reason innovation is moving forward is one thing: basic research at flagship universities. The quest to seek new findings is leading the charge in preparing the best workforce that exists out there, and through it, the whole ecosystem flourishes. Undergraduate students get implicated in research, the community is pulled in through education and technical college activities, and it becomes something of its own innovation ecosystem that flourishes. Each one of my grants led to the fact that my students have always been hired by industry months before graduation to be the change and the future workforce.

The future workforce needs more attention, and that attention is primarily through funding basic fundamental research that lifts the whole ecosystem up. Let us push that more, understand that more. Let us create more initiatives where we integrate middle school, high school and technical colleges with research universities, get industry to collaborate and keep propelling the trajectory forward. Only then, and through well-crafted initiatives, can we enhance the shortened attention span of our future workforce.

Let us move to the second problem: leadership.

Manufacturing is a beautiful career choice. It is stable, it is long term, and it pays off to those executing it, and the generations to come. It makes the whole ecosystem stable for everyone. The problem is when industry attempts to accelerate the cycle for financial gains. I understand economy, and I understand the need to “earn” more, to reinvest and push the cycle forward. But manufacturing cannot operate faster than it actually can. We do not want planes falling out of the sky, we do not want cars that create undetected toxic fumes, we do not want electric batteries that explode and stay on fire. We want innovation with safety and quality mechanisms. And that takes time.

---

This op-ed appeared in the inaugural issue of SCBIZ magazine. Click here to view the online version.

---

The development and success cycle requires multiple iterations, including failures. Companies need to accept failure as part of the process, especially now that manufacturing is moving more toward cognitive manufacturing in the upcoming decade. Our research on that shows this is the path that is needed for the U.S. to maintain its leadership role, and that needs time. Everybody is collecting data and producing all kind of fancy names for the next breakthrough, but the goal is to put it into use and not collect for the sake of collection.

So the manufacturing cycle needs to be better understood by leadership and the industrial financing system. Steady growth is better than grow-to-burst methodologies.

The third and final problem: politics and policies.

Manufacturing is the fundamental way to create a steady livelihood and stability. Support for manufacturing should transcend political fractions. Manufacturing should not be used – ever – as a bargain in political agendas. Policies should protect investments and future manufacturing abilities. We can disagree and/or agree on most other elements, but manufacturing should be spared from ever being a bargaining chip. A facility in a rural area would protect the very own existence of that rural area. In its essence, manufacturing is the value added that transforms goods and increases their economic value. Through this process, financial stability gets  created and stability rains throughout the whole supply chain. We do that very well in South Carolina but would love to see it more (and more).

In conclusion, manufacturing is the cornerstone of economies, but it cannot thrive on its own. The future workforce is in danger — and not to sound alarming — but I would add “grave” danger. Leadership needs to be more patient, and the political establishment needs to spare manufacturing from any sparring.

In future editions of this op-ed, I will detail how our work on future manufacturing is helping to push the manufacturing needle towards greatness. Despite some failures that we will address, the results are helping make South Carolina the birthplace of future manufacturing.

Ramy Harik, a Fulbright Alumni, is the director of the Clemson Composites Center and a professor of Automotive Engineering at Clemson University. Harik holds degrees in Mechanical Engineering (B.S./M.S.), Automated Manufacturing (M.S.), and Industrial/Mechanical Engineering (Ph.D.). His teaching focuses on manufacturing, smart manufacturing, and composites manufacturing.

The post OPINION: Making and keeping manufacturing great in South Carolina appeared first on SC Biz News.