by Fronetics | Jun 8, 2015 | Blog, Manufacturing & Distribution, Strategy, Supply Chain
For many years robots seemed like the brainchild of science fiction writers and directors, meeting the needs of humans as we saw in the Jetsons, or challenging them as we saw in Battlestar Galatica. Occasionally we hear stories on the news of robots being built in basement labs at prestigious universities such as MIT or Stanford. Recently there was a report on NPR about how one of UCal Berkeley’s robots couldn’t easily figure out how to fold laundry, so, one could ask: what are we worried about? If robots can’t fold laundry in under ten minutes, could they take over manufacturing?
There has been a downward trend in manufacturing jobs since 1980 in the U.S. with similar spirals in Japan, Germany, and China. Is there a correlation between the decrease in manufacturing employment and the rise of the robot? According to the Wall Street Journal, in 2014 most industrial robots were operating in the same countries/regions: Japan (306,700 robots), North America (237,400), China (182,300), South Korea (175,600), and Germany (175,200).
In the same WSJ article, a new generation of robots is profiled. These robots are “smarter, more mobile, more collaborative, and more adaptable.” They are also less bulky and less dangerous for humans to work next to. One might say that the newest generation of robots is acquiring many of the positive qualities of human workers, and that that, combined with many skills humans don’t and can’t possess, makes them the ultimate worker. If robots supersede the work humans can physically do, in a faster, safer, more efficient way, then what will come of the human worker?
Many believe that robots will allow for manufacturers to return to the U.S. from their low-paying, cost-saving plants overseas. They also believe that robots won’t take away from jobs, but rather create them. According to the International Federation of Robotics (IFR), robots actually create millions of jobs. The IFR’s reports oppose the idea that manufacturing jobs are waning. In 2011 article Positive Impact of Industrial Robots on Employment, the author, Metra Martech, stated, “The German and Japanese (automotive) manufacturers who have invested heavily in automation and robots have maintained a lead in the quality market. Germany has increased the number of people employed in the automotive sector.”
The IFR also states that there are many other benefits to robots in manufacturing:
- robots carry out work in areas that would be unsafe for humans.
- robots carry out work that would not be economically viable in a high wage economy.
- robots carry out work that would be impossible for humans.
“The Second Economy”, one in which computers have business interactions only with other computers, is upon us. According the to economist, Brian Arthur, who coined the term, things might not look so bright for the future of the American worker. He states, “If the Second Economy does achieve that rate of growth, it will be replacing the work of approximately 100 million workers. To put that number in perspective, the current total employed civilian labor force today is 146 million. A sizeable fraction of those replaced jobs will be made up by new ones in the Second Economy. But not all of them. Left behind may be as many as 40 million citizens of no economic value in the U.S alone. The dislocations will be profound.”
Others, some who are at the forefront of technology, are also very concerned about the rise of robots. Apple co-founder, Steve Wozniak, is one of the worried. He was recently quoted saying, “Computers are going to take over from humans, no question… Like people including Stephen Hawking and Elon Musk have predicted, I agree that the future is scary and very bad for people. If we build these devices to take care of everything for us, eventually they’ll think faster than us and they’ll get rid of the slow humans to run companies more efficiently.T”
The stuff of sci-fi is becoming a reality. As we humans make the robots that will replace us, only time will tell if that will benefit our race or harm it.
by Fronetics | Jun 4, 2015 | Blog, Marketing, Social Media, Strategy
When thinking about where to focus your company’s social media presence, look at the numbers. LinkedIn generates 80% of B2B social media leads, more than Facebook, Twitter, and Google+ combined. A 2013 study conducted by Demo and CEO.com shared that “LinkedIn remains the one social media platform that is actually more popular with CEOs than the general public.” Why are company higher-ups turning to LinkedIn, the top professional social media platform?
LinkedIn currently has more than 350 million users, from over 200 countries and territories, and sees 2 new members added each second. A good amount of people, 40%, check LinkedIn daily. With these impressive numbers and LinkedIn’s goal of reaching 3 billion users, a company profile is bound to get traffic, especially if the company is utilizing the publishing format to share ideas and situate itself as a leading voice in the industry.
Your own employees, current and former, most likely have their own LinkedIn profile. They list their education, and of course, their work history. If your company does not have a LinkedIn page, there will be no logo to click on, no link, no exposure for you, and perhaps a loss of credibility. In today’s tech-savvy world, being engaged in social media platforms has come to be the norm for individuals and companies. People spend 1.72 hours on social media a day; let them find you easily during that time.
Leads:
With LinkedIn being the top social media site to generate leads, why not highlight your company there? Unlike Facebook, you have the ability to see who is looking at your company’s profile, and now, with LinkedIn’s newest analytics service, users can see who has been viewing their posts. Users can also see how many people liked and shared a post, and see more detail into demographics such as viewers’ industry, location, and job titles. By understanding who is looking at your company’s page or posts, you can see which demographic you’re reaching, and which you’re missing. You can reach out to those who show repeated interest and try to find ways to tailor future content to attract the people you’re not reaching.
Credibility:
Let your former and current clients and partners advertise your expertise for you. With the “recommendations” and “endorsements” features others can help build your level of trust with potential leads.
Coaches, consultants and recruiters also comb through LinkedIn looking for company matches for their clients. According to Executive Coach and Consultant, Stephenie Girard, “I rely on companies to use LinkedIn to increase their credibility, attract quality talent and expose their product or professional services. When organizations utilize LinkedIn in full capacity we gain access to the company’s values, culture, people and products – all of which are crucial pieces to the puzzle when matching a potential employee to employer.”
Connections:
Finding leads directly might be on your mind, but finding other business people and businesses that you can follow, monitor, learn from, and partner with, can also be incredibly valuable and may, in the end, bring you some leads and great business allies.
Once you have the connections made on LinkedIn, stay in touch with your old and new connections, clients, and customers. Many companies use LinkedIn as another platform to share press releases, white papers, videos, and product announcements.
According to Business Insider article LinkedIn May Not Be the Coolest Social Network, but It’s Only Becoming More Valuable to Businesses, “LinkedIn has the advantage of being the place for white-collar professionals to network, meaning its population is highly desirable since it is a high-income and highly educated user base.” Is LinkedIn right for you? If you’re looking for intelligent professionals, perhaps it is.
![Women in the Supply Chain; A Discussion [eBook]](https://www.fronetics.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/women.jpg)
by Fronetics | Jun 3, 2015 | Blog, Strategy, Supply Chain
Between 70% and 80% of positions within the supply chain industry are held by men and 95% of top level supply chain positions within Fortune 500 companies are held by men.
The lack of gender diversity is bad for business. Recent research by McKinsey & Company found that companies in the top quartile for gender diversity are 15% more likely to have financial returns above their respective national industry medians. Moreover, Arrow Electronics’ Cathy Morris points put that “diversity enables better decision-making and diminishes group think.”
At Fronetics we believe it is important to discuss the supply chain gender gap, and to work towards closing the gap. We have created an eBook which is inclusive of interviews with:
- Mickey North Rizza, VP, Strategic Services at BravoSolution.
- Cathy Morris, senior vice president and chief strategy officer for Arrow Electronics, Inc.
- Don Firth, founder and CEO of several niche job boards
We invite you to join the discussion: connect with us on LinkedIn or Twitter, or leave us a comment.
by Fronetics | Jun 3, 2015 | Blog, Strategy, Supply Chain
Between 70% and 80% of positions within the supply chain industry are held by men and 95% of top level supply chain positions within Fortune 500 companies are held by men.
The lack of gender diversity is bad for business. Recent research by McKinsey & Company found that companies in the top quartile for gender diversity are 15% more likely to have financial returns above their respective national industry medians. Moreover, Arrow Electronics’ Cathy Morris points put that “diversity enables better decision-making and diminishes group think.”
At Fronetics we believe it is important to discuss the supply chain gender gap, and to work towards closing the gap. We have created an eBook which is inclusive of interviews with:
- Mickey North Rizza, VP, Strategic Services at BravoSolution.
- Cathy Morris, senior vice president and chief strategy officer for Arrow Electronics, Inc.
- Don Firth, founder and CEO of several niche job boards
We invite you to join the discussion: connect with us on LinkedIn or Twitter, or leave us a comment.
by Fronetics | Jun 2, 2015 | Blog, Leadership, Strategy, Supply Chain, Talent
On average, men make more than women. Here’s why we need to change this and close the wage gap.
On average, men make more money than women. This is what we call the wage gap— the financial divide between the sexes. This is a complex issue, not one that has an easy explanation, but one that is deeply rooted in history, tradition, and culture. In a field that has been dominated by men, it is no surprise that women generally paid less than men in the supply chain.
We assume women have equal rights, given the number of anti-discrimination acts that have been passed, and protection from the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which outlawed discrimination based on sex, national origin, color, race, and religion. However, somehow women are still paid less, and almost 95 years after the Equal Rights Act amendment to the constitution was introduced, and 45 years since the amendment was passed by Congress, it has still not been ratified by the necessary number of states.
Women occupy just 15% of editorial pages, corporate boards, and congressional seats, according to the OpEd Project. The US ranks 20th overall out of 142 countries in the 2014 World Economic Report Global Gender Gap Report which examines and ranks a country’s level of equality based on health, education, earning potential, and political empowerment. Breaking the data down even more, it was found that the US was ranked 65th in wage equality out of 142 countries studied. Given its status as a leading world power, and that women are gaining great strides in education, what do these rankings mean for the United States?
The complexity of the wage gap
The wage gap is complex. It’s not simply a matter of blatant discrimination. Some argue that the pay gap is not a gender gap but a motherhood gap. Women tend to work part-time more than men due to demands at home, and part-time workers get paid less on average. Because women are often tied to domestic responsibility (ranging from cleaning, cooking and childcare) they work fewer hours than men, on average. They take more breaks from continuous employment and therefore may have decreased opportunities to get promotions, and climb the ladder. According to the Wall Street Journal, “today, childless 20-something women do earn more than their male peers. But most are likely to cut back their hours after they have kids, giving men the hours, and income, advantage.”
According to Kevin O’Marah, chief content officer at SCM World, there are two factors deterring women from rising through the supply chain ranks: first is the intermittent work history some women have due to family care, “Every day is a chance to have a disaster. It’s very high pressure. Stepping out for even a couple of months makes it very hard to get back in.” Second, O’Marah points to information that shows that men apply for jobs they’re not fully qualified for, whereas women only apply for jobs for which they feel they are 100% qualified. According to O’Marah, “Men are typically promoted on potential they exhibit, whereas women are promoted on results. Men jump at opportunities, even if they don’t have the qualifications; women have a tendency to say: ‘I’m not ready for that’.” Could the “feminization of higher education” be the confidence builder and, eventually, the equalizer women need in the future?
Women are excelling in education in the US, not only in terms of enrollment numbers, but also in terms of grades. Females spend more time studying and typically get better grades, however it has been found that the return on investment on a college degree for women was lower than, or the same as, for men. According to The Economist, “Although women as a group are now better qualified, they earn about three-quarters as much as men. A big reason is the choice of subject: education, the humanities and social work pay less than engineering or computer science. But academic research shows that women attach less importance than men to the graduate pay premium, suggesting that a high financial return is not the main reason for their further education.”
Addressing the gap
We know there’s a pay gap. Why should we help lessen it, and how do we do it?
Understanding that equal pay for women is a benefit for everyone, not simply for women, is key. According to the Shriver Report, one third of American women live in poverty. This puts a strain on an entire family, and on our social support systems. If women are given the education, support, and opportunities to work we can help alleviate poverty, stimulate economic growth, strengthen the middle class, and secure our place as a leading country.
Colleges and universities can continue to recruit and encourage women to apply, matriculate, and graduate from business programs. Harvard’s Peek Program is encouraging women to get a taste of what an MBA is like as a means of encouraging growth in their program, which is currently 41% female. In 2014, for the first time, females made up more than half of Rutger’s MBA students. There are many degree and diploma programs in Logistics and Supply Chain Management cropping up across the country. Encouraging young women to pursue this interesting and lucrative field is critical. Assuming that women should be funneled into typically “female” occupations is perpetuating the assumptions, prejudice, and micro-aggressions we often find in discrimination.
In an article on closing the gender gap in the supply chain, Will Green writes of a future in which, “’forward-thinking firms’ will team up with schools to encourage girls to study science and engineering, while successful women in these jobs will act as role models.” These firms will allow for an environment that is friendly to work-life balance for women and men, permitting women to rise through the ranks, also allowing men to take more of a role in domestic life. These things combined may help to achieve a sense of equality for women in the workplace.
It will benefit everyone if we can remember that we all have a role and a stake in the health and growth of the supply chain, whether we are leaders, employers, employees, consumers, male, or female. Our ranking, our integrity, our success, and our future as a country depend on it.
by Fronetics | Jun 2, 2015 | Blog, Leadership, Strategy, Supply Chain, Talent
On average, men make more than women. Here’s why we need to change this and close the wage gap.
On average, men make more money than women. This is what we call the wage gap— the financial divide between the sexes. This is a complex issue, not one that has an easy explanation, but one that is deeply rooted in history, tradition, and culture. In a field that has been dominated by men, it is no surprise that women generally paid less than men in the supply chain.
We assume women have equal rights, given the number of anti-discrimination acts that have been passed, and protection from the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which outlawed discrimination based on sex, national origin, color, race, and religion. However, somehow women are still paid less, and almost 95 years after the Equal Rights Act amendment to the constitution was introduced, and 45 years since the amendment was passed by Congress, it has still not been ratified by the necessary number of states.
Women occupy just 15% of editorial pages, corporate boards, and congressional seats, according to the OpEd Project. The US ranks 20th overall out of 142 countries in the 2014 World Economic Report Global Gender Gap Report which examines and ranks a country’s level of equality based on health, education, earning potential, and political empowerment. Breaking the data down even more, it was found that the US was ranked 65th in wage equality out of 142 countries studied. Given its status as a leading world power, and that women are gaining great strides in education, what do these rankings mean for the United States?
The complexity of the wage gap
The wage gap is complex. It’s not simply a matter of blatant discrimination. Some argue that the pay gap is not a gender gap but a motherhood gap. Women tend to work part-time more than men due to demands at home, and part-time workers get paid less on average. Because women are often tied to domestic responsibility (ranging from cleaning, cooking and childcare) they work fewer hours than men, on average. They take more breaks from continuous employment and therefore may have decreased opportunities to get promotions, and climb the ladder. According to the Wall Street Journal, “today, childless 20-something women do earn more than their male peers. But most are likely to cut back their hours after they have kids, giving men the hours, and income, advantage.”
According to Kevin O’Marah, chief content officer at SCM World, there are two factors deterring women from rising through the supply chain ranks: first is the intermittent work history some women have due to family care, “Every day is a chance to have a disaster. It’s very high pressure. Stepping out for even a couple of months makes it very hard to get back in.” Second, O’Marah points to information that shows that men apply for jobs they’re not fully qualified for, whereas women only apply for jobs for which they feel they are 100% qualified. According to O’Marah, “Men are typically promoted on potential they exhibit, whereas women are promoted on results. Men jump at opportunities, even if they don’t have the qualifications; women have a tendency to say: ‘I’m not ready for that’.” Could the “feminization of higher education” be the confidence builder and, eventually, the equalizer women need in the future?
Women are excelling in education in the US, not only in terms of enrollment numbers, but also in terms of grades. Females spend more time studying and typically get better grades, however it has been found that the return on investment on a college degree for women was lower than, or the same as, for men. According to The Economist, “Although women as a group are now better qualified, they earn about three-quarters as much as men. A big reason is the choice of subject: education, the humanities and social work pay less than engineering or computer science. But academic research shows that women attach less importance than men to the graduate pay premium, suggesting that a high financial return is not the main reason for their further education.”
Addressing the gap
We know there’s a pay gap. Why should we help lessen it, and how do we do it?
Understanding that equal pay for women is a benefit for everyone, not simply for women, is key. According to the Shriver Report, one third of American women live in poverty. This puts a strain on an entire family, and on our social support systems. If women are given the education, support, and opportunities to work we can help alleviate poverty, stimulate economic growth, strengthen the middle class, and secure our place as a leading country.
Colleges and universities can continue to recruit and encourage women to apply, matriculate, and graduate from business programs. Harvard’s Peek Program is encouraging women to get a taste of what an MBA is like as a means of encouraging growth in their program, which is currently 41% female. In 2014, for the first time, females made up more than half of Rutger’s MBA students. There are many degree and diploma programs in Logistics and Supply Chain Management cropping up across the country. Encouraging young women to pursue this interesting and lucrative field is critical. Assuming that women should be funneled into typically “female” occupations is perpetuating the assumptions, prejudice, and micro-aggressions we often find in discrimination.
In an article on closing the gender gap in the supply chain, Will Green writes of a future in which, “’forward-thinking firms’ will team up with schools to encourage girls to study science and engineering, while successful women in these jobs will act as role models.” These firms will allow for an environment that is friendly to work-life balance for women and men, permitting women to rise through the ranks, also allowing men to take more of a role in domestic life. These things combined may help to achieve a sense of equality for women in the workplace.
It will benefit everyone if we can remember that we all have a role and a stake in the health and growth of the supply chain, whether we are leaders, employers, employees, consumers, male, or female. Our ranking, our integrity, our success, and our future as a country depend on it.
