Productivity

Beyond the Status Quo: Rethinking Workforce Development for a Competitive Future

David O’Connor, Head of Emerging Markets, The Learning Wave As a nation, we take pride in our innovation and adaptability. However, when it comes to workforce development, we still find ourselves lagging behind. The challenges are clear: a widening skills gap, ongoing productivity issues, a growing need for both transferable and technical skills, and businesses struggling to meet global competition demands. Are we ready to push boundaries and adopt effective solutions for today’s workforce and tomorrow’s needs? Or are we content to tinker at the edges of a broken system? Recent conversations suggest the latter. So, what can we do? It’s easy to blame outdated educational structures, funding issues, inter-agency hurdles, and slow policy changes. But are we truly held back by the system, or are we reluctant to challenge the status quo? Current structures, though well-intentioned, often miss the mark when it comes to evolving business needs. We need a shift towards flexibility, continuous learning, and strong industry partnerships. We must stop waiting for the government to solve the skills gap; we require more business-led initiatives. Relying solely on government action is unrealistic and short-term thinking. Instead of waiting for mandates or funding schemes, the government should incentivize businesses with tax breaks for upskilling and training their staff. The business community must lead the way. Organisations can – and should- drive change by partnering to source and fund necessary skills training. Many companies recognize the value of investing in their workforce, and there’s an opportunity to create a coordinated, industry-wide effort that harnesses the best training available. Small businesses often claim they can’t make an impact, but we can transform isolated successes into a nationwide movement. Collaboration among businesses is key to creating a more agile and responsive training ecosystem that meets the needs of both employers and their […]

Can we be world-class leaders?

From October issue NZ Manufacturer magazine www.nzmanufacturer.co.nz -Ian Walsh, Partner, Argon and Co Recently, I had the opportunity to work with business leaders on New Zealand’s productivity performance and, how it compares to key trading nations and OECD members. Over the past 50 years, New Zealand’s ranking has fallen from being in the top five to the bottom five. It’s a tough reality, but more interestingly, the discussion centred around why Scandinavian countries and Ireland excel while we continue to struggle. Many attribute New Zealand’s lagging performance to factors like distance to market, limited access to capital, and the small size of our domestic markets. Undoubtedly these do play a role, but they are largely beyond a business’s control. No matter how efficient we become, we still face the challenge of shipping goods across the globe. If we focus on these external factors alone, we will continue to run the risk of overlooking the most crucial areas where we can improve – leadership and people management. Studies show that New Zealand consistently underperforms in these areas compared to other OECD nations, and this is not a recent development. Over the last 40 years, other countries have systematically invested in cultivating great leaders, while New Zealand seems to have fallen into five fatal assumptions about leadership. The Five Fatal Assumptions About Leadership in New Zealand: Promoting the best operator to leader will work out Many workplaces fall into the trap of promoting the best operator to leadership roles. While they are often respected for their technical skills, they may lack the ability to manage people effectively. This can result in the loss of a great operator and sometimes even a demotivated team. Leadership requires a different skill set—one that needs to be developed, not assumed. Leaders are born, not made The […]

Winston Peters’ $100 billion infrastructure fund is the right idea. Politics-as-usual is the problem

-Timothy Wech, Senior Lecturer in Urban Planning, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau New Zealand’s infrastructure woes are a constant political pain point. From ageing water systems to congested roads and assets increasingly threatened by climate change, the country faces mammoth upgrading and future-proofing challenges. Enter Winston Peters and NZ First with a surprise proposal for a NZ$100 billion “Future Fund” dedicated to infrastructure investment. Sounds promising – but the proposal’s success will hinge on getting the details right and, more importantly, getting the politics out of infrastructure planning. Unveiled at NZ First’s annual convention last weekend, the idea bears striking similarities to challenges previously highlighted by urban planning and infrastructure experts. The country currently has an estimated infrastructure deficit of over $100 billion which aligns eerily with the scale of Peters’ proposed fund. The Future Fund proposal sounds impressive on paper. Ring-fenced from political meddling and focused on national interests, it’s billed as a silver bullet for infrastructure funding problems. Peters claims he’s taken a page from the Singapore and Ireland playbooks – potentially breaking New Zealand’s habit of treating big infrastructure projects like they’re part of a three-year plan. Long-term savings As always, the devil is in the details – and the Future Fund is light on them. How exactly would this fund be financed ? How would projects be selected and prioritised? And, crucially, how would it be insulated from the political interference it claims to avoid? The potential benefits are significant.Research suggests that a stable, long-term approach to infrastructure investment and better utilisation of existing assets could unlock substantial savings – potentially up to 40% of total project costs. A well-managed $100 billion fund could provide the certainty and consistency needed to achieve these efficiencies. The scale of the fund also aligns with the urgent need for […]

Northland focus: Fiona Bycroft, CEO, Naut

Catherine Lye, CEO of Advanced Manufacturing Aotearoa (AMA) on a recent business trip to Northland, suggested a focus on the movers and shakers and innovators up there. Fiona Bycroft of Naut gets the ball rolling… Fiona Bycroft, CEO, Naut (left) What does Naut specialise in? Naut enables customers to head out on the ocean or lakes, have an amazing day doing everything they usually would, and sometimes more, and return home leaving nothing but wake! We do this by providing electric propulsion systems that fit into the boat of the users choice with the final drive of the users choice, be that stern drive, jet unit, or the Naut outboard. A key difference between a Naut system and a conventional system is the reduction of noise, fumes and pollution and higher reliability. A key difference between the Naut system and other electric systems is the power – the Naut system is 350hp+ and can easily get a boat planing. How is Naut finding current business conditions? Naut has technology that is ready to go to market. Like any new tech, it needs those early adopters to come on board to demonstrate the technology in different sectors and use cases. Naut is excited about where the conversations are going with these early adopters, so watch this space (or maybe I should say watch the waterways near you) Are there export opportunities for your products? Absolutely! We are keen to see more systems sold to NZ based individuals or companies first, and then Australia and USA are natural next markets. However we have already received interest from a number of other countries, and are always open to talking to either boat builders or boat users from around the globe. How easy is it to find the right staff members? Because we are […]

Stop calling workplace safety failures ‘accidents’

By Paul Jarvie, EMA Manager of Employment Relations & Safety With the Government signalling that significant reform of our workplace health and safety regulations are on the way, it’s time to look at the language we use around preventable harms. For too long, ‘accident’ has been a blanket term that absolves responsibility. Whether at home, on the road, or in our workplaces, we’ve grown accustomed to shrugging off incidents as ‘accidents’. But are they truly random acts beyond our control, or is there more to the story? When we label something an ‘accident’, we imply innocence and inevitability. It’s a linguistic shrug that suggests nothing could have been done differently. But the reality, backed by extensive research, paints a different picture. Insurance companies that provide cover for ‘accidental damage’ base their premiums entirely on historical data of such events. They know these events will happen, how many, when and how. The premium setting process uses vast databases to ensure the number of claims do not exceed their premium income – that’s how they remain in business. It’s a similar system to ACC for injury claims. In 2023, ACC handled nearly 200,000 workplace claims, with many stemming from repeat incidents that were likely to have been identified in companies’ hazard registers. As such, they were neither unknown nor unforeseen. This data underscores the need for a more nuanced approach in our safety lexicon. In workplaces, terms like ‘incident’ or ‘near miss’ are often used interchangeably with ‘accident’. Yet, these terms don’t adequately capture the essence of what really happened: a failure in systems, procedures or human judgement that resulted in harm or damage. Take aviation, where research from the Pilot Institute found that pilot error accounted for 69.1% of plane crashes, with 17.2% due to mechanical issues and 13% of unknown […]

How your business can benefit from the circular economy

From September issue of NZ Manufacturer www.nzmanufacturer.co.nz Small Business and Manufacturing Minister Andrew Bayly, along with Climate Change Minister Simon Watts, introduced a new MBIE report showing circular opportunities for the manufacturing sector. “Manufacturing is a sleeping giant for New Zealand’s economy; with the right tools and support, manufacturing has the potential to supercharge our economic growth,” Bayly said. “The manufacturing sector accounts for 10 per cent of GDP, 60 per cent of our exports, and employs 230,000 people.” Increasing demand for low-carbon-manufactured goods “Globally there is increasing demand for low-carbon manufactured products. Our agile and innovative manufacturers with their strong green reputation and access to relatively low-carbon electricity are well positioned to take advantage of this demand,” he added. Watts emphasises that the manufacturing sector is already heading in the right direction and is supporting New Zealand in meeting its climate change targets. However, there is still more to be done. “That’s why we are providing manufacturers with information to support them to adapt their business to be less carbon-intensive, with the launch of a new online toolbox, report and dataset.” Circular economy critical for future of manufacturing The circular economy is critical component of modern manufacturing. Adopting circular economy principles can help you to significantly reduce costs while making your business more sustainable. The circular economy (CE) is a concept that changes how we produce and consume goods. It uses systems thinking to design out waste and pollution, keep products and materials in use and regenerate natural systems. CE moves us away from the current ‘linear’ model of producing and consuming goods and services: ‘take-make-dispose’. It has economic, environmental and social benefits. It is also closely linked to the Bioeconomy, which uses renewable biological resources to produce food, products, and energy. […]

Paying a ‘unique’ price: Why it can pay to be the same

-Frank Phillips, Managing Director, Fulcrum The Hook “But we’re unique, no one else takes bespoke orders that morning, processes and ships them that afternoon.” “Not even your competitors?” “Yes, they do….but they are much bigger and can afford to develop systems that are perfect for themselves”. “Is there anyway to test how bespoke these orders really are?” The Problem This conversation, in various guises happens regularly with clients, and sometimes it’s true, but often, we’re not as unique as we think. And that’s a good thing! The more unique we are, or decide to be, in our operations the more expensive our journey to digitisation becomes. This becomes particularly salient against the backdrop of New Zealand’s beating heart of manufacturing SME’s being in the midst of a perpetual battle when it comes to digitisation. Firstly, weighing up the challenging costs of developing digital systems and automated processes that are fit for purpose with realistic return on investment. Whilst secondly, being touted the value of Industry 4 technologies but facing a skills barrier to adoption. The Solution So what advice would I give to any manufacturing business looking to digitisation and automation be? It’s simple. Start thinking about your internal operations differently. Or paradoxically, not different at all. Whilst there is widespread appreciation for needing a clear competitive advantage, that thing or things that set you apart and make you unique. Extending this thinking to everything about your business can hamper digital progress, driving you to look for or build bespoke solutions that match your processes perfectly. Where competitive advantage should be ‘up in lights’ externally. Internally we should be asking ourselves the question ‘how can we make this process as similar as possible to other operations’. This is for two reasons: It’s cheaper to borrow than build. If that’s the […]

Lifting productivity: Why investment in talent and technology must go hand in hand

-David O’Connor, Head of Emerging Markets, The Learning Wave In the evolving landscape of the manufacturing sector in New Zealand, the adoption and successful implementation of smart technology are undeniably key drivers of productivity. However, without parallel investments in upskilling the workforce, the potential gains from such technological advancements may be left unrealised. At a recent industry event, a business owner shared their experience of raising significant capital to introduce cutting-edge technology in their food manufacturing business. The implementation, however, came to a halt as it became clear that the existing staff lacked the necessary skills to operate the new systems, which led to multiple challenges to meet production requirements. This scenario raises the question: Is this an isolated incident, or a reflection of a broader trend where businesses overlook the critical need for workforce readiness in their technology strategies? Investment in both areas —developing your talent and adopting the new advanced technologies— must be seen as complementary rather than separate business strategies. Business leaders must ensure that their HR and training teams are fully integrated with their Operations and IT efforts, creating a seamless approach to lifting staff capability that aligns with technology implementation plans. When these efforts are given equal priority, they create a cycle where skilled and engaged workers drive technological adoption, and in turn, the technology enhances the capabilities and productivity of the workforce—a win-win situation. One client likened their smart technology experience to “buying a Ferrari but then handing the keys over to kids on their learner’s license in full knowledge that they would crash it’. While this analogy might be an apt description of their workforce’s current skill level, it also serves as a cautionary tale for business owners. The cost and potential setbacks of implementing advanced technology without a focused and skilled workforce […]

Navigating the manufacturing technology landscape: MES vs MDH vs MMP

Adam Sharman, CEO LMAC Group, APAC As manufacturing organisations strive to optimise their operations, the adoption of technology has always been a key focus. In the last 10 years, developments in digital technologies for manufacturers have increased pace and, whilst most organisations recognise the opportunity presented by these developments, the rapidly changing ecosystem of systems can make it difficult to identify the best fit for the business. The landscape of manufacturing or operational management systems has evolved considerably in recent years, with multiple options available to fit the needs of the business based on scale, complexity and requirements. Three solutions that have gained significant traction are Manufacturing Execution Systems (MES), Manufacturing Data Hubs (MDH), and Machine Monitoring Platforms (MMP). Each offers unique benefits and comes with its own set of limitations. This article aims to provide a comprehensive comparison to help manufacturers make informed decisions on which of these solutions is the best fit when considering investment in OT software. Manufacturing Execution Systems (MES) MES is a comprehensive software solution that manages and monitors work-in-process on the factory floor. It operates in real time to enable the control of multiple elements of the production process, including: – Resource allocation and status – Production scheduling – Dispatching production units – Quality management – Labor and material tracking – Performance analysis MES serves as a bridge between planning systems like ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) and the actual production processes, providing a holistic view of how current conditions on the plant floor can be optimised to improve production output. Benefits Comprehensive Production Management: MES provides end-to-end visibility and control over production processes, from order release to finished goods. Real-time Decision Making: Offers real-time data and analytics, enabling quick responses to production issues. Quality Control: Integrates quality management processes, reducing defects and improving overall […]

Manufacturers have unique opportunity to bank talent

With forecasts from the Hanga-Aro-Rau Workforce Development Council showing the manufacturing, engineering, and logistics (MEL) sectors will need to fill over 157,000 jobs over the next 5 years, existing recruitment strategies need to be widened to include those with transferable skills from other industries. As NZ Manufacturer business advisor and director of Auckland public relations agency Impact PR Mark Devlin has found, recent government cost-cutting measures could provide an opportunity for manufacturers to access a resource critical for the sector’s future growth. With thousands of government and private sector workers made redundant during the recession and from public sector cuts in recent months, the opportunity exists for the manufacturing sector to create a talent bank of skilled workers. This could help futureproof the sector by accommodating thousands of new employees in manufacturing firms nationwide. A large proportion of the 6,000+ Government workers who are losing their jobs as a result of public sector cuts have highly transferable skills that are in short supply and could be absorbed by a wide range of manufacturing firms that contribute directly to the country’s economic growth. What we know of government workers is that they are well-trained in many of the key competencies in desperate need within the manufacturing sector. This includes people from government departments with an existing relationship with industry such as WorkSafe, NZTE, ACC, and MPI. With Māori and Pacific Peoples expected to make up a growing proportion of the workforce the sector needs to be looking to bring in greater diversity and more cultural awareness – and the Government workforce has an abundance of expertise in this area. As a nation, we have invested heavily in developing our government workforce and it is critical we move to retain these skills, many of which are unique to our ethnic and demographic […]

‹ 1 2 3 4 ›»

News Ticker

Productivity