What Apple’s Supply Chain Says About US Manufacturing and Middle-Skill Training

supplychain-e1332517890132.jpg

In January, The New York Times released a front-page report on the iEconomy, Apple’s vast and rapidly growing empire built on the production of tech devices almost exclusively overseas. The fascinating story created a wave of attention when it was published, and it’s back in the news after NPR’s “This American Life” retracted its story about working conditions at Foxconn, one of Apple’s key suppliers of iPhones and iPads.

The end of the “This American Life” episode includes a discussion (audio | transcript) between host Ira Glass and Charles Duhigg, the NYT reporter who wrote the iEconomy piece, on Apple’s supply chain and the reason the tech giant doesn’t produce its insanely popular devices in the U.S. Perhaps you thought the main reason was labor costs; Apple would have to pay American workers much more than the estimated $17 a day (or less) many Chinese workers at Foxconn make. That’s part of it, but “an enormously small part,” Duhigg told Glass.

Duhigg explained that, in terms of labor costs, producing the iPhone domestically would cost Apple an additional $10 (on the low end) to $65 (on the high end) more per phone. “Since Apple’s profits are often hundreds of dollars per phone, building domestically, in theory, would still give the company a healthy reward,” he wrote in the NYT piece.

Instead, what matters is Apple’s intricate Chinese supply chain. Duhigg went into detail in his conversation with Glass:

Compared to the cost of buying chips or making sure that you have a plant that can turn out thousands of these things a day or being able to get strengthened glass cut exactly right within, you know, two days of this thing being due, that’s what’s important. Labor is almost insignificant. What is really important are supply chains and flexibility of factories. You want to be able to be located right next to the plant that makes the screws so that when you need a small change to that screw factory, you can go next door and say, “Give it to me in six hours,” and they can say, “Here you go.” Because if that factory was in another state or on another continent, it would take two weeks. It’s the flexibility within the Chinese manufacturing system, that’s what you can do in Asia that you can’t do in the United States.

Another major reason why Apple produces the iPhone and iPad abroad is the huge (and available) skilled workforce in China. When Apple needed 8,700 industrial engineers to oversee 200,000 assembly-line workers involved in making the iPhone, the firm looked at how long it would take to find that many workers in the U.S. Its answer: as long as nine months — compared to 15 days in China.

This boils down, according to Duhigg’s report, to the lack of American workers with “mid-level skills that factories need, executives say.”

Companies like Apple “say the challenge in setting up U.S. plants is finding a technical work force,” said Martin Schmidt, associate provost at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In particular, companies say they need engineers with more than high school, but not necessarily a bachelor’s degree. Americans at that skill level are hard to find, executives contend. “They’re good jobs, but the country doesn’t have enough to feed the demand,” Mr. Schmidt said.

From Whose Bourn No Manufacturing Returns

So, what does this mean for manufacturing in the U.S.?  For the most part there are no surprises here. These are known, core issues in the U.S. We’re well aware of the skilled worker drought. We’re aware that we’ve shipped much of our production process off-shore. But, we keep saying to ourselves, we’ve increased our productivity. We’re innovating and we’re keeping the profits, right? To answer that we can say “maybe” and “sorta.”

There’s currently a debate raging about how we calculate our productivity. It’s a complex issue that we won’t get deep into here (check out this recent article in the Washington Post for more), but the gist is that our methodology for calculating productivity might be overstated. Like, a lot. Biases within this methodology have tended to convert a factory’s price savings through outsourcing into an increase in output. As Peter Whoriskey of the Post puts it:

For example, suppose a U.S. factory decides to offshore the production of a part for which it used to pay $1. With the switch to an overseas supplier, it might pay 50 cents for the part. If U.S. statistics do not capture this drop in price, the savings by the U.S. factory can show up as a gain in output and productivity.

Changes like these aren’t an increase in output due to innovation and greater productivity per worker. These are savings, which are certainly great for that factory, and certainly mean better profit margins, but which aren’t productivity increases that we get to point to as the silver-lining of our inky manufacturing cloud.

That’s one element. The other element sits very near and dear to our heart here at EMSI. There’s a very basic theory at work in our impact studies and I/O model, and it’s that tight supply chains are good. The goal of any regional economy should be to develop complete supply chains. The less that an industry has to bring goods and services into the region from outside, the greater effects we see from increases in those industries. In other words, “Great job, China.” But this leaves the US at a disadvantage. Yes, low-cost Chinese manufacturing has facilitated growth in the US economy. However, this has happened at the expense of the US developing these complete supply chains.

Maybe If We Ask Real Nice

Now, this is an extremely complicated issue, and things have developed as they have for a reason. However, when we ask the question, “what would it take to manufacture iPhones in the US?” — a question tantamount to “what would it take to get all of those manufacturing jobs over here?” — if the supply chain is the deciding factor, then the answer might be something along the lines of “too late.” At this point, manufacturing supply chains are so thoroughly concentrated in China that bringing them back to US soil seems more or less impossible. There may be little we can do about manufacturing jobs leaving the US.

The Data

However, instead of simply offering some sound — albeit pessimistic — reasoning on the issue, let’s look at some data on manufacturing. Since jobs are in the spotlight, and productivity measures have received some heat, we’ll simplify the issue a little and just look at job growth in manufacturing.

In terms of industry performance, 74 manufacturing industries saw growth from 2001-2006; 65 saw growth from 2006-2009; and 210 saw growth from 2009-2011. This is, of course, growth of any amount. This indicates a slight, recent uptick in the variety of industries experiencing some amount of growth.

Typically, we look at net growth for industries. We combine growth and decline to show the overall growth and decline. Here’s net decline for manufacturing for three different periods:

Net Change Average Annual Net
2001-2006
-2,211,513
-368,586
2006-2009
-2,193,021
-548,255
2009-2011
-99,250
-33,083

Job loss seems to slow in that 2009-2011 period.

We’ll look at one more series of data, before we wrap up. What if we look at decline and growth separately instead of simply the net of both? This will allow us a discrete view of whether decline has slowed or growth has quickened, or perhaps a combination of both.

First, decline:

Decline Average Annual Decline
2001-2006
-2,481,385
-413,564
2006-2009
-2,321,862
-580,466
2009-2011
-300,690
-100,230

Manufacturing decline considered on its own appears to have slowed in the past few years.

Now, growth:

Growth Average Annual Growth
2001-2006
269,872
44,979
2006-2009
128,841
32,210
2009-2011
201,440
67,147

Gain in the manufacturing sector seems to have picked up pretty noticeably.

This analysis is not nuanced. As other sources have made plain, this is a complex issue. However, it remains true here that job growth in manufacturing has picked up somewhat, and that decline has slowed. We’re still seeing net losses, so this isn’t evidence of recovery. However, it does mean that not absolutely every manufacturing job is moving offshore. At least not yet.

Not to mention that there’s some support for the idea that we’re seeing some “reshoring” — manufacturing jobs coming back to the US. A recent report from The Boston Consulting Group claims that by the end of the decade we could see a reshoring of 600,000 to 1 million jobs. The report explores the seven broad industry sectors “most likely to reach a ‘tipping point’ over the next five years—a point at which China’s shrinking cost advantage should prompt companies to rethink where they produce certain goods meant for sale in North America.” Are we seeing the beginnings of this in our more recent industry data? Or do we stand to lose more manufacturing jobs to China? We’ll have to wait and see.

Stevenson has worked at EMSI, an Idaho-based economics firm, since 2006. He's a regular contributor to the EMSI blog. Contact him at josh@economicmodeling.com.



















Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The team performs a final

The team performs a final random inspection comprising of a detailed visual inspection of goods before shipment. It is generally conducted on the premises of the manufacturer, on samples selected according to defined sampling procedures.
Quality Inspection China

I do wish there were more

I do wish there were more people like you around on the interwebs. Not many people are careful with their words, including myself sometimes. I have written things I would love to take back, goo work, keep it up. - Melia Propolis

Took me time to read all the

Took me time to read all the comments, but I really enjoyed the article. It proved to be Very helpful to me and I am sure to all the commenters here! It's always nice when you can not only be informed, but also entertained! I'm sure you had fun writing this article. - baju hamil modis

This is not what as many

This is not what as many purely understand. I don't understand, Foxconn is a Chinese firm while Apple is US base. Why not Apple get a manufacturing firm from their homeland to produce their devices instead of taking all manpower and production in China.

Cheers,
Deanna Amirante, designer of ipad smart cover/

American life

Jeez I cant believe I bumped in this article on This American Life in just couple days after discussing the same with my work mate. I must have to say Apple is only able to bring out cheap iPhones/ iPads or other iProducts out of its Chinese and Foxconn connections. If they ever stop this one connection, two things will happen, either the Apple products prices would go high or the stock holders would be pissed off at the same. But in reality, at least few Americans like me would be just okay to know what we use are just made by individuals in the labor standards we have here or at least something that is acceptable. Just read a super beta prostate review here. An honest review.

read the full info here

I'm not going to lie, I'm really impressed. Just stumbled across your blog and I recently identified your own post and still have been recently studying along.I like this topics very much.I search for this many days.Please let me know when you update your topics.I will wait for your update.Thank you - Mobile Detailing Sydney

When writing the story of

When writing the story of your life don't let anyone else hold the pen.

rajasthani special

These are some amazin stuffs

These are some amazin stuffs to get inspired by. Makes us think why can’t we do such beautiful work.Patek Philippe watches//Rolex online

have a peek at these guys

You're so cool! I don't think I've read anything like this before. I do wish there were more people like you around on the interwebs. Not many people are careful with their words, including myself sometimes. I have written things I would love to take back, goo work, keep it up. - manhole

I have noticed the report on

I have noticed the report on New York times regarding iEconomy of Apple. It was quite famous new also on that days. Thanks for sharing the new info about it. I felt it is really interested and quite amazing to know. go here

This website has very good

This website has very good content. Please let me know if you're looking for a article author for your weblog. So I am sure this website will form the well-known in the future. - cara memperbesar alat vital

Positive site, where did u

Positive site, where did u come up with the information on this posting?I have read a few of the articles on your website now, and I really like your style. Thanks a million and please keep up the effective work. - tabung pemadam api

After examine a few of the

After examine a few of the blog posts on your web site now, and I really like your manner of blogging. Wonderful being going to your blog once again, it's been weeks to me. This report in which i am silently laid for such a long time. I would like this information to complete my own project within the school, and possesses exact same topic using your.. - Paket cream walet asli

The examination explores the

The examination explores the seven dogmatically manufacture sectors most credible to achieve a tipping point over the close quintuplet years-a quantity at which China's shrinking toll plus should prompt companies http://www.testbells.com/650-393.html

click here to find out more

It's always nice when you can not only be informed, but also entertained! I'm sure you had fun writing this article. Thank you for the great article I did enjoyed reading it, I do wish there were more people like you around on the interwebs. - sprei murah

Wow, cool post. I'd like to

Wow, cool post. I'd like to write like this too - taking time and real hard work to make a great article. but I put things off too much and never seem to get started. Thanks though. - Xamthone

Regional economies import

Regional economies import and export for many reasons but most come down to comparative advantage and factor endowments. The point is that trade occurs because two parties benefit from the transaction. The economy is slowly climbing out of a recession and with it comes higher levels of output which require labor (and likely other inputs). Davidson’s point was that because firms located in the US hire well-rounded skilled labor, US manufacturing firms are able to adapt more quickly than their Chinese counterparts. He did also mention that US firms have a difficult time finding those workers.
http://ameriloansearch.com/

Nice

This is one of the good articles you can find in the net explaining everything in detail regarding the topic. I thank you for taking your time sharing your thoughts and ideas to a lot of readers out there.buy Botox online

Ask yourself how many

Ask yourself how many customers would have driven to two Canadian Tires and pushed their clerks to get this Hotel di Semarang Murah . One. Just me. It's for my wife. Our 15th anniversary is this week. Just wanted to drop a comment and say I am new to your blog and really like what I am reading.