Manufacturing Technology

Reflecting on a year of New Zealand manufacturing

From The Year in Review, NZ Manufacturer magazine, December issue. By Hon Chris Penk, Minister for Small Business and Manufacturing As 2025 draws to a close, it’s a good moment to reflect on a year of resilience and progress for New Zealand’s manufacturing sector. The year brought challenges, but there is much to celebrate, and I’m proud to represent a sector that spans so many different industries. Manufacturing is at the heart of our economy. It’s the petroleum processor in Taranaki, the wood miller in Rotorua, the food and beverage producer in Hastings, the metal fabricator in Hamilton, the chemical technician in New Plymouth, the machinery engineer in Christchurch, and the equipment assembler in Dunedin that we have to thank. The sector employs more than 220,000 people, generates roughly 8 percent of GDP, and accounts for 60 percent of our exports. Over the past year, export growth has been strong, reflecting the dedication and innovation of manufacturers across the country. One highlight for me was hosting the first Minister for Manufacturing Awards at SouthMACH in Christchurch in May, supported by Advanced Manufacturing Aotearoa. These awards celebrated leadership and creativity, with 38 entries narrowed to 16 finalists across four categories. It was a fantastic opportunity to recognise excellence and connect as an industry. More recently, I have been inspired by Kiwi manufacturers winning awards at regional, chamber, and national business events. Gallagher New Zealand Trade and Enterprise received the Supreme Award at the International Business Awards. RML Machinery in the Waikato, AROTEC Diagnostics Limited in the Hutt Valley, and United Machinists in Dunedin each earned top honours in their regions. These successes show how manufacturers are fueling regional prosperity, boosting our competitive edge, and showcasing worldclass expertise. Many parts of the sector are not standing still; they are growing and […]

The Argon Academy: Turning capability into competitive advantage

Scott Adams, Managing Principal, Argon & Co NZ In today’s manufacturing landscape, technology, automation, and efficiency are no longer enough. Your real competitive edge comes from your people — their capability, confidence, and ability to adapt, innovate, and perform. That’s where The Argon Academy stands apart. For more than 20 years, Argon & Co has worked alongside New Zealand and global organisations to lift performance by strengthening skills, embedding continuous improvement, and developing leaders who drive transformation from the inside out. The Academy exists because we saw a critical gap: too much training focuses on delivering content, not building capability. Most programmes are taught by facilitators — not practitioners who have actually led the change and delivered results. The Academy was built to change that. Our learning approach is different. Every programme is grounded in real-world experience from practitioners who have managed transformation, driven productivity gains, and delivered measurable business outcomes across sectors like food and beverage, packaging, industrial manufacturing, and logistics. This means your teams learn from people who’ve done the work — not just talked about it. Rather than providing off-the-shelf courses, The Academy partners with clients to co-design tailored, best-practice learning pathways that align directly with your operational goals. We build capability that sticks — embedding new skills, behaviours, and mindsets into the way people lead, collaborate, and perform every day. This practitioner-led approach transforms training from a cost into a strategic investment. It creates measurable uplift in productivity, safety, and employee engagement — turning learning into a sustained competitive advantage. As businesses face mounting pressure from digitisation, sustainability, and global competition, the need for a digitally capable, future-ready workforce has never been greater. Building that capability takes long-term investment, government and industry collaboration, and access to world-class learning solutions. Quick-fix training won’t get you there — […]

Two Factories, One Economy

NZ Manufacturer, December issue. How the Same Conditions Create Winners and Loser Christmas is almost here and for many it can’t come fast enough. Another year of holding on, fighting fires and telling ourselves we just need to wait for better times to arrive. Yet look across the industry and you’ll see something striking: the same tough conditions producing completely different outcomes. One manufacturer is crawling to the finish line; another is smashing targets and celebrating wins. The break ahead isn’t just an opportunity to rest, it’s a reset. David Altena is Head of Growth & Partnerships at SmartSpace.ai & C0-Founder & Host of The Better SMB Podcast. david@altena.solutions The biggest variable in 2026 won’t be the economy. It’ll be the mindset you choose over the holidays. Because when you strip away the noise, this year has made one truth impossible to ignore: the same conditions are producing entirely different results. Some firms have spent 2025 wrestling the economy like an anchor, while others have treated it like a headwind to lean into… uncomfortable, but navigable. That contrast is the real story. It tells us the gap between struggling and succeeding may not be the market at all, but the mindset leaders bring to it. Rob Bull is Director of The New Zealand Lean Academy. rob@nzla.nz This is where the tale of two manufacturers begins The phrase we heard so much last year, “Survive till ’25”, was the hope we were clinging to, but it quickly morphed into “Survive 25,” reflecting how many manufacturers feel worn down by another long, slow year. Stories of closures, liquidations and persistent pressure have reinforced the sense that the economy is dictating our destiny. It is easy to get swept into that narrative. Yet, if we look closer, we find a stark contrast, two […]

Controlling Ignition Sources through ORS

Chris Beh, Think Consulting Oxygen Reduction Systems (ORS) utilise a process to lower the atmospheric oxygen levels of 21% below the ignition threshold for the items stored in an area (e.g. below 14%) – a proactive, preventative fire protection system unlike fire suppression, such as sprinklers, which are reactive (i.e. initiate only when a fire event occurs). Typically, nitrogen is generated from ambient air using on-site pressure swing adsorption (PSA) units and introduced into the area to be protected. Uses for the technology has been in high-value occupancies where the use of traditional fire suppression technologies such as fire sprinklers is challenging due to space constraints and hydraulic design (e.g. for adequate pipe work), tight or congested storage, lack of established protection design methodologies, or need to avoid water or chemical residue damage. Globally, there are more than 500 installations of these systems with applications in high-bay and freezer/cold store warehouses, datacentres and museums and libraries where valuable artifacts need protection from fire without exposure to extinguishing agents. In New Zealand, the use of this technology has mainly been in high-bay, cold store warehouses with the popularity of the system slowly becoming recognised. Firms considering installing ORS should consider the following which may influence both the acceptance (such as insurer) and the requirements imposed on facilities utilising this technology, noting this list is not exhaustive. Design Undertake a risk-based design review of the system and process including operation, maintenance and health and safety. Ensure the operating oxygen level is correctly designed for the hazard class being stored. The protected area sealed and structurally suitable for maintaining reduced oxygen levels. The enclosure that contains the reduced oxygen environment is to be constructed of non-combustible material. This area is to maintain the oxygen design concentration for twelve hours with all operations shutdown […]

2026: It’s Now or Never

From December issue, NZ Manufacturer – The Year in Review Ian Walsh, Partner, Argon & Co NZ We have finally seen the “green shoots” and those businesses still going can finally tick the survive (till) 2025 box. Confidence is on the up and activity is starting to move, what a ride! But what have we learned? Here are a few reflections from me. Traditional approaches to getting through the hard times are no longer enough. Many businesses tightened their belts, let people go, stopped all discretionary spending, travel etc. and didn’t make it. Waiting for things to get better is not a strategy. This is just giving your competitors, especially those overseas, a free pass. We can no longer rely on distance and separation for protection. NZ is easy to access and service from anywhere, if you think you are safe you may be deluding yourself. It is all about productivity. We must face into this reality, we can’t work harder or longer we already top this league, we must work differently and recognise the rest of the world is and has adapted, and so must we. There’s no avoiding it or waiting for government intervention. We have some core industries and capabilities which are world leading. Our dairy and tech sectors are world-leading, with aspirational companies. Let’s not be complacent; let’s push on and assert and grow these advantages. We have a window of opportunity. Carpe Diem. Now is the time, before the next global uncertainty. It is now or maybe never. Identify your strategic competitive advantage and actualise it? Need help? Seek it. We are brave and innovative, the pioneering spirit lives strong, we can do this. There are enough tall poppy killers out there, lets celebrate the go getters, the achievers, the adopters and the triers and […]

Material passports for construction: Why I see them less as banks… and more as donor registries

From December NZ Manufacturer -Troy Coyle,CEO,HERA Across the infrastructure and construction sectors, material passports are emerging as a promising tool for enabling circularity. They’re often described as a “bank of materials,” and I understand why (in fact HERA even describes them this way). After all, they catalogue the materials embedded within a building so they can be withdrawn at the end of life and reused elsewhere. The more I’ve worked with the concept, the more I’ve found that the banking analogy falls short. In fact, my own conceptualisation has shifted quite significantly: I now see material passports as closer in spirit to a donor organ registry than to a passport or financial ledger. This is because for reuse to work in construction, it’s not enough to know what materials exist. We also need to understand which components are actually compatible with which future projects- this makes it much like donors and recipients in medical systems. This compatibility challenge is where I believe the next evolution of thinking must occur. Why the “Material Bank” analogy isn’t enough Material passports are often framed as banks because they identify valuable materials for future “withdrawal.” The logic is sound: buildings act as repositories of steel, timber, concrete elements, glass, fixtures, and systems that shouldn’t be lost to landfill or downcycling. However, in a bank, all currency of the same denomination is interchangeable. One dollar equals another dollar. Construction materials are not interchangeable in this way. Two steel beams of the same nominal specification may have vastly different histories, including different loading conditions, different environments, different coatings, different compliance requirements. Their future use potential can vary dramatically. This is where the financial metaphor starts to break down for me. Why I think the organ donor registry analogy fits better In my view, material passports need […]

Building psychologically safe, high-performance cultures: Why ISO 45003 matters for NZ manufacturing

From December issue, NZ Manufacturer www.nzmanufacturer.co.nz Theresa Grainger, General Manager, The Lean Hub Every manufacturing site I visit, whether it is a busy factory floor or a small specialised workshop, I believe has one universal truth and that is that people want to feel valued, supported, and safe to share their ideas and do meaningful work. This is where ISO 45003 adds real value, released in 2021 as the world’s first global standard dedicated to managing psychosocial risks and it has become increasingly relevant as organisations recognise that wellbeing and high performance go hand in hand. Building on the foundation established by ISO 45001, ISO 45003 extends workplace safety into an area many organisations still find challenging to define and measure: the mental, emotional, and social conditions of work. It provides guidance for creating environments where people can not only perform well but genuinely thrive. At its core, ISO 45003 is about both preventing harm and protecting workers from psychosocial risks before they escalate. It encourages organisations to take a proactive approach, identifying early warning signs and addressing the root causes of stress or conflict, and designing work environments that reduce the likelihood of harm. The standard offers not just compliance guidance, but a roadmap for building resilient, high-performing and people-centric operations. Personally, this is where it really resonates for me, I love what it represents because it speaks to something I have witnessed again and again in my work: when we design workplaces around people, when we honour their wellbeing, their voices, and their value, the entire organisation lifts. It is also deeply aligned with the principles of Lean and Continuous Improvement, at its heart, Lean isn’t just about eliminating waste, it is about creating environments where people can collaborate openly, feel safe to speak up and bring their […]

The tough year that was 2025

From December issue of NZ Manufacturer www.nzmanufacturer.co.nz The Year That Was -Sean Doherty 2025 was a brutal year for most New Zealand manufacturers, with many focused on staying afloat rather than growing. Rising costs for electricity, gas, labour, and raw materials squeezed margins across almost every subsector. Official data shows manufacturing employment fell by 2.6% meaning around 6,300 jobs were lost in just 12 months. The pain was felt from the factory floor to senior leaders, with many firms freezing hiring, cutting shifts, or closing lines to survive. Primary processing feeling the strain New Zealand’s traditional strengths in meat, timber, and dairy processing were not enough to shield the manufacturing sector from mounting cost pressures. Even large, historically resilient processors were forced to seek offshore funding and recapitalisation to keep plants running. These moves reflect a deeper reality: high input costs and intense international competition are eroding the ability of local processors to reinvest in plant, technology, and people at the pace required to stay globally competitive. Construction-linked manufacturing hit hard Manufacturers tied to the domestic building and construction sector took the a big hit in 2025. As the pipeline of new housing and commercial projects shrank, demand for building-related products dropped sharply. Several major timber mills closed, leading to hundreds of job losses. While high electricity and operating costs were part of the story, the real challenge was a combination of a weaker local construction pipeline and new international competitors, which made large, capital-intensive investments in New Zealand mills increasingly hard to justify. Ownership changes: selling to survive The need for capital and stability drove some of the most significant ownership changes the sector has seen in decades. Farmer-shareholders at Alliance Group voted to sell a 65% majority stake to Ireland’s Dawn Meats for $270 million, ending 77 years […]

Lifting Productivity from the Ground Up

How project engineering keeps NZ manufacturing efficient, safe, and moving Caliber Design, Christchurch Productivity is one of the most talked-about issues in New Zealand manufacturing. We all want to do more with less: more output with fewer delays, more progress with leaner teams, and more innovation with limited budgets. Yet productivity is not only about machines or technology. It is just as much about how projects are delivered. Every year, manufacturers invest millions in upgrades, automation, and plant improvements. Whether those projects add real productivity depends on one thing: how well design transitions to delivery. That is where project engineering makes a quiet but measurable difference. Planning that prevents waste Every successful project needs more planning than just a timeline. A good project engineer will identify risks early, validate the scope and technical deliverables, and plan sequencing so that the right work happens in the right order. We saw this recently on a multi-site upgrade where the factory could not afford any unplanned downtime. By mapping out isolations, access, and parallel work streams, the project engineer saved two weeks on installation and avoided a costly mid-project rework. These savings rarely show up as headlines, but they result in less time lost to rework, fewer hours spent chasing decisions, and smoother commissioning. Coordination that keeps people productive Even the best design will stall without good coordination. Modern manufacturing projects bring together multiple suppliers, contractors, and compliance demands. Someone has to keep the stakeholders all aligned on the actual deliverables for successful execution. On a large materials-handling project, one of our project engineers managed more than 20 subcontractors. Rather than reacting to site issues, they held short daily stand-ups with each trade, resolved bottlenecks on the spot, and kept everyone working to a clear, shared schedule. The project finished ahead of plan […]

Make your emissions data stand up to scrutiny

Starting out with your first carbon footprint, or refining years of data? Either way, the credibility of your greenhouse-gas (GHG) numbers matters. Reliable, verified information builds trust with customers, regulators and supply-chain partners – and helps you make confident decisions. Here’s how to find the right type of independent check for your business. Why independent checks matter Independent reviews give confidence that your figures are robust and transparent. For manufacturers, they can reveal data gaps in energy use, fuel consumption or process emissions; reduce the risk of overstated “carbon-neutral” claims; and strengthen credibility with clients, boards and export markets. A third-party perspective adds objectivity and helps demonstrate integrity – especially useful when bidding for contracts or supplying international brands that ask for evidence of sustainability performance. Choosing the right GHG evaluation approach Term Use for: What is reviewed (include timeframe) Outcome Verification Public reporting or disclosure where independent checks are required. Credibility for boards, investors, or regulators. Historical GHG data, calculation methods, and processes. Timeframe: Past or current reporting period. Independent statement of assurance – limited (regulatory) or reasonable (investor-grade). Validation Setting or updating emissions reduction targets. Testing future assumptions or pathways. Assumptions, models, and methods for projections. Timeframe: Future targets or scenarios. Opinion on whether your approach and assumptions are sound and achievable. External review Independent feedback before verification or disclosure. Checking inventory or scope 3 estimates. Data, methods, and reporting approach. Timeframe: Past or current data. Informal feedback to improve quality; no formal assurance. Assurance Building confidence in verified data for regulated or investor reporting. Choosing limited or reasonable assurance. Verified historical information. Timeframe: Past reporting period. Formal statement confirming confidence level in verified data. Certification Claiming carbon neutrality or joining programmes (e.g. Toitū, Ekos, Climate Active). Public recognition of verified results. Verified data, reduction plans, and […]

1 2 3 4 ›»

News Ticker

Manufacturing Technology