Developments

$50 Billion up for grabs thanks to new procurement rules

NZ Manufacturer magazine, November 2025 By Hon Chris Penk, Minister for Small Business and Manufacturing You may have seen the Finance Minister’s recent announcement about changes to how the Government buys goods and services. I want to make sure Kiwi businesses hear the good news because the new procurement rules, coming into effect on 1 December 2025, are designed to give small and homegrown firms a real chance to win government work. If landing a government contract has ever felt out of reach, now is the time to take a closer look. Government procurement is big business. Each year, agencies spend over $50 billion on goods, services, and infrastructure. That is a huge opportunity for local manufacturers, suppliers, and service providers. Until now, feedback from the business community showed that too many local manufacturers and small and medium-sized enterprises found the process complex, time-consuming, and costly to engage with. The Government has responded to that challenge with reforms aimed at making the system simpler and fairer. The number of procurement rules will reduce from 71 to 47, cutting duplication, streamlining processes, and making it easier for businesses to understand what is expected when bidding for government work. One of the most significant changes is a new rule requiring agencies to consider the economic benefit to New Zealand in every procurement. When evaluating bids, agencies must now give at least 10 percent weighting to how a supplier’s proposal will benefit the New Zealand economy. That benefit could include using local suppliers, creating jobs, supporting regional businesses, or investing in skills and training. For the roughly 20,700 manufacturers in New Zealand, this means the Government wants to work with businesses that help New Zealand thrive. The change will support local firms directly and also encourages international companies to show how they will […]

3d rendering humanoid robot with ai text in ciucuit pattern

Could a ‘grey swan’ event bring down the AI revolution? Risks we should be preparing for

Cameron Shackell, Sessional Academic, School of Information Systems, Queensland University of Technology The term “black swan” refers to a shocking event on nobody’s radar until it actually happens. This has become a byword in risk analysis since a book called The Black Swan by Nassim Nicholas Taleb was published in 2007. A frequently cited example is the 9/11 attacks. Fewer people have heard of “grey swans”. Derived from Taleb’s work, grey swans are rare but more foreseeable events. That is, things we know could have a massive impact, but we don’t (or won’t) adequately prepare for. COVID was a good example: precedents for a global pandemic existed, but the world was caught off guard anyway. Although he sometimes uses the term, Taleb doesn’t appear to be a big fan of grey swans. He’s previously expressed frustration that his concepts are often misused, which can lead to sloppy thinking about the deeper issues of truly unforeseeable risks. But it’s hard to deny there is a spectrum of predictability, and it’s easier to see some major shocks coming. Perhaps nowhere is this more obvious than in the world of artificial intelligence (AI). Putting our eggs in one basket Increasingly, the future of the global economy and human thriving has become tied to a single technological story: the AI revolution. It has turned philosophical questions about risk into a multitrillion-dollar dilemma about how we align ourselves with possible futures. US tech company Nvidia, which dominates the market for AI chips, recently surpassed US$5 trillion (about A$7.7 trillion) in market value. The “Magnificent Seven” US tech stocks – Amazon, Alphabet (Google), Apple, Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia and Tesla – now make up about 40% of the S&P 500 stock index. The impact of a collapse for these companies – and a stock market bust – would be devastating at a global level, not just financially but also in terms of dashed hopes […]

Why strategy can feel stale

Jane Finlayson Strategic Doing Facilitator | Independent Consultant For some manufacturers, the last strategy they developed never got traction and didn’t survive the turbulent times we’ve been experiencing. For others their strategy lives in a document that no one’s opened since the last planning retreat. That’s not because people don’t care. It’s usually because the plan doesn’t really align to the culture of the business or how people actually work day to day and things just get “too busy”. The sector been through a few rough years — COVID, supply chain shocks, inflation, floods, staffing challenges. The latest Manufacturing Productivity Index from BusinessNZ tells a pretty clear story: output is down, confidence is soft, and many businesses are focused on survival, not growth. It’s understandable. But it also makes now an ideal time to reset and refocus strategy for the future. Strategy alone isn’t enough A well-crafted strategy can set direction. But culture or the way your people feel, think, and behave, to solve problems together determines whether that strategy produces results. When strategy and culture are aligned, the waka moves forward faster. Both need to be agile so you have the ability to change direction when needed. Manufacturers know this intuitively. You can feel the difference between a team that’s aligned and one that isn’t. On a shop floor, when things click, productivity hums. Collaboration is a strategic asset One of the most powerful things I’ve seen in projects over the years is how fast momentum builds when people collaborate, regardless of their roles, their tenure or their culture. People love being part of the winning team. What I like about Strategic Doing as a framework is it provides a structure to create shared ownership and accountability through regular check-ins and small, doable steps that keep the waka moving. […]

Before the Robots Roll in, is your system healthy enough to handle innovation?

NZ Manufacturer magazine Guest Article by Theresa Grainger, The Lean Hub & Productivity Excellence Academy. Every manufacturer is striving to lift productivity and much of the current focus is on investing in smarter machines, automated processes and AI. But the real question isn’t what we are going to automate, it is what state we are automating. Because if the system underneath is unhealthy, for example unclear processes, tired teams, neglected assets, then new technology doesn’t fix the instability, it amplifies it. One of the clearest indicators of system health and a direct driver of productivity is how well we maintain the discipline of improvement. In New Zealand, many manufacturers are pushing hard to stay competitive in a tough global economy, yet beneath the surface we are seeing an imbalance. While the PDCA (Plan-Do-Check-Act) cycle is a core framework for improvement, in practice we tend to excel at the “Plan” and “Do” stages. However, the final two steps “Check” and “Act” are often overlooked, limiting our ability to learn, improve, and sustain gains. When productivity slips, our instinct is often to add capacity, new machinery, software, or automation. But more often, the real issue isn’t a lack of resources, it is that silos have formed and people, processes, and systems are no longer aligned or working together effectively. An asset might fail because it wasn’t serviced, but teams often miss their targets for less visible reasons, like unclear communication, blurred accountability, or lack of clear ownership. Just as machines need regular maintenance, so do our organisational systems and leadership. A regular check on system health and culture can reveal the early signs of misalignment before they impact performance. When we build a culture that pauses to reflect, learn and reset, we create the conditions for genuine improvement. It’s not just […]

The hidden role of project engineering in NZ Manufacturing

Smart manufacturing is not just about advanced machines, data, or automation. It is also about how projects are delivered. In New Zealand, where margins are tight and downtime is expensive, project engineering is often the difference between a smooth delivery and one that struggles to get finished. Beyond the Plan Every successful project needs more than a timeline. It needs people who can anticipate risks, make practical decisions in real time, and keep everyone aligned. That is what project engineers do. They combine design knowledge with delivery discipline, bridging the gap between disciplines and helping transition drawings to reality. On capital projects across food processing, heavy industry, and advanced manufacturing, project engineers often make the difference between a clean handover and weeks of extra work and significant variations. They understand both the design intent and the realities of construction. They know when to challenge assumptions, when to push for clarity, and when to make a call on the spot so progress is not lost. Why It Matters Now NZ manufacturers are juggling more complexity than ever: tight labour markets, growing compliance demands, and the high cost of downtime. With stretched teams and costly shutdowns, there is little margin for error when delivering capital projects. Manufacturing projects today carry more moving parts (compliance, cost control, and tighter schedules) which makes disciplined delivery even more important. Project engineers bring that discipline and most importantly technical oversight. By planning ahead, coordinating suppliers, and promptly solving problems, they reduce delays, avoid rework, and keep production running. Real-World Impact We see this value play out across industries. Food Processing Upgrade On a major line expansion, the design work was sound, but the risk lay in how quickly equipment could be installed and commissioned before production needed to resume. A project engineer coordinated trades, validated as-built […]

Beyond the roadmap: How Argus made people the engine of change

Adam Harvey, Business Performance Partner – Manufacturing, The Learning Wave Running operations today feels like living in two realities at once. On one hand, you know the plant has to modernise. The systems are creaking, customers want more for less, and digital tools promise the efficiency you need. On the other hand, you look around the floor and think: “My people aren’t ready for this.” That’s where we see so many transformations stall. The roadmap is clear, the tech is lined up, the investment made, but the people who have to use it don’t feel confident, don’t trust it, or don’t see why it matters. And then the numbers don’t move. Dashboards gather dust. Automation creates frustration. The new machine sits there like an expensive ornament. Argus chose a different path. One that not only delivered the transformation but unlocked double-digit lifts in productivity and quality along the way. Technology set the stage, people made it work After engaging LMAC to run a SIRI readiness survey, their plan was clear: invest in digital tools, shop-floor intelligence, automation, and smarter integration. Dsifer built the data backbone. Design Energy explored automation. The roadmap was solid, and the tools were lining up. The Board and GM believed in the vision, but crucially, they also believed that the only way this transformation would stick was if they first invested in their people. They knew that tech doesn’t run the factory, people do. Dashboards don’t drive performance if no one looks at them. Automation doesn’t add value if the team doesn’t trust it. New systems don’t solve problems if people are too nervous to use them. That’s why Argus called us. “We need you to work with our people and get them ready for this transformation.” We built people’s confidence so they trusted the […]

Age-Inclusive Manufacturing: Making Flexibility Fair on the Factory Floor

By Shyamini Szeko, reflecting on Master’s research into ageing and work in New Zealand manufacturing (AcademyEx, 2025) Why Flexibility Matters “My 32-hour week lets me maintain a healthy sleep schedule and personal life,” one long-serving factory worker told me during my research. That small adjustment meant he could keep working instead of being forced to leave early. But not everyone is offered this chance. In my survey, 86% of manufacturing staff said flexibility is “very important,” yet almost half reported seeing no age-inclusive action in their workplace. The message is clear: older workers want to stay engaged, but workplaces are not keeping pace. Unless manufacturers change course, they risk losing valuable skills and knowledge just when they need them most. The Flexibility Gap On the office side of manufacturing, flexibility is common. Staff can work from home, adjust hours, or take phased retirement. But on the factory floor, older workers face rigid shifts, heavy physical demands, and inconsistent support. As one HR professional told me: “Flexibility simply does not work on the factory floor.” Yet my research shows that is not true. Even modest changes to duties or scheduling can keep people in the workforce for longer. The issue is not whether flexibility can work, but that it is unevenly applied, often depending on the goodwill of a manager instead of fair, transparent policy. Health, Shifts, and Real Lives Rigid shift patterns can take a toll. Fatigue, musculoskeletal strain, and disrupted sleep become harder to manage with age. When schedules are adapted, the impact is immediate. The worker who moved to a 32-hour week is one example. Others told me that reduced rotations or less physically demanding duties made the difference between staying on the job or considering early retirement. Flexibility is not about lowering standards. It is about sustaining […]

The Business Owners Exit Dilemma

David O’Connor, Platform 1 Many aging business owners have worked hard all their lives and are at a stage where they have built up a business that has given them a good income and lifestyle and it’s part of who they are. They know they should do something at some stage but often the easiest thing to do is to delay, however procrastination can be costly, not just in lost time but in missed opportunities to secure the future of your business. The earlier you start planning the more options you will have. There are many different reasons we hear for procrastination in relation to exiting a business : “I have still got 5 years in me” “Nobody has the knowledge to run it like I can” “What if I don’t find anyone?” “But someone offered me $5M 5 years ago…” “The market and our sales are down so maybe I should just delay until next year ?” “What exit options do I have ?” “Do my kids even want to take over and do they have the skills?” If you’re considering an exit plan, start now rather than focus on the “why not” to ensure the best outcome for you and your business. Talk to someone who has experience in this area and understands the various options. “ There is no one exit option that is right for all business owners “ Our advice is to review all the options before make a decision. Options could include : Your staff (Management Buy-Out) An Outright Sale Business Owner Transition (Management Buy-In) Merger Private Equity – If you are big enough Most people understand the outright sale process and it can be a go to strategy simply because it’s well known. It’s the right option for some business owners but […]

From survival to strategy

Creating a business that runs without you Step into almost any Kiwi workshop at 6 a.m. and you’ll find the owner already there, fixing yesterday’s problem before the team clocks in. They’re signing off orders, juggling suppliers, answering calls and putting out fires faster than they ignite. By mid-morning they’ve handled a breakdown, approved a quote, covered for someone off sick, chased an overdue invoice… and by evening they’re back on email. Not by choice, but because if they don’t, no one else will. David Altena is head of Growth & Partnerships at SmartSpace.ai and C0-Founder and Host of The Better SMB Podcast. We call it leadership. In reality, it’s survival with a spreadsheet and it’s no wonder we’re producing 30% less than our OECD peers. Here’s the uncomfortable truth: if your business grinds to a halt the moment you step away, you don’t own a business, you own a job with overheads. That’s no foundation for a high performing business, growth, or succession. Rob is Director of the New Zealand Lean Academy. www.rob@nzla.net Survival isn’t strategy Contrast that with firms operating at a higher level of maturity. Leaders aren’t caught up in the day-to-day, they have clear business plans and measurable KPIs. They hold quarterly reviews where leaders coach instead of firefight. They invest in systems to capture knowledge and create consistency and aren’t reliant on one person’s memory or availability. Their systems are stronger than their heroes. The markers of operational maturity Operational maturity doesn’t come from a new machine or a fresh ERP licence. It comes from design and discipline, doing the boring things brilliantly: Clear purpose and numbers: every employee knows the three metrics that matter most and how their work moves them. Standard work before scale: processes are documented, taught and audited so improvements stick. […]

Could a laser-generated plume be the next biohazard scare?

By Ruth Nicholson, Laser Safety Officer and Director at NZ Laser Training Institute Ltd Lasers are an emerging technology used across various industrial applications such as precision cutting of metals, welding components with minimal heat distortion, or hardening to improve wear and corrosion resistance. Unlike ordinary white light, they emit a single wavelength of light specifically designed to target materials. When workers use lasers for welding or removing corrosion from surfaces, a laser-generated plume is created. The plume or visible smoke that you can see identifies the bigger particles. However, it is what you can’t see that causes more hazard and harm. The plume is a mixture of smoke, invisible vapours, and airborne contaminants that can be produced as a byproduct of laser processing, where heat sources interact with substrate materials. Plume generation occurs with Class 4 lasers and some Class 3B lasers and can be either ‘contained’ or ‘airborne’. Each scenario presents a risk. However, the hazard level depends on how the by-product plume is managed afterwards. This interaction between the laser and the target relies on the scientific principle that specific wavelengths of light energy can affect targets such as grease, soot, paint, rust, oil, debris, or other forms of corrosion. Laser-generated plumes are a non-beam hazard; they are silent, subtle, and often overlooked. The contents of the plume depend on the materials being lasered and they can include carcinogenic particles, such as silica and hexavalent chromium. Specific laser interactions can decompose materials into toxic substances, such as hydrogen chloride and hydrogen fluoride. It’s essential to emphasise that exposure to non-beam hazards can pose immediate safety threats or delayed health issues, some of which may not be readily recognised, as the hazard itself is still emerging. Laser-generated air contaminants (LGACs) can appear in both particle and gas forms. Some of the […]

1 2 3 4 ›»

News Ticker

Developments