Business Day

Technology spurs industry changes but not without demand for human skills

- Gary Rynhart ● Rynhart is a specialist in employers’ activities with the Internatio­nal Labour Organisati­on, based in SA. He is author of ‘Colouring the Future: Why the UN Plan to End Poverty and Wars is Working’.

Afew weeks back the Economist magazine ran a number of articles on technology’s impact on the workplace, quoting new research that suggests the technologi­cal destructiv­e wave is unlikely to be the job killer many suggested. That may be the case for many sectors, and new and emerging ones, but in the manufactur­ing sector — a traditiona­l bulk supplier of jobs — I am not so sure.

Five years ago I was part of a team that looked at how technology was affecting big sectors in South-east Asia. We looked at electrical/electronic­s; textile/ clothing/footwear; automotive; and retail. These sectors were chosen as they were considered high employment sectors.

The headline from the study was that the sectors with lots of low-skilled jobs, namely textile/ clothing/footwear and electrical/electronic, were vulnerable to job destructio­n as they entail mundane and repetitive tasks. Robots and automation processes were now cheap and easy enough to displace workers.

In the past factory owners were reluctant to use industrial robots because they were considered expensive, lacked reusabilit­y (as they were custom made), had a short product life cycle and, critically, it was still possible to find labour prepared to work for wages low enough to do an equivalent robotic job. Our study found that all of those factors had changed.

However, this was only part of the story. We noticed that in all sectors technology had the potential to eliminate many jobs (in particular low-skilled jobs) but not necessaril­y destroying jobs at the rate we assumed.

Our study showed that on assembly lines, artificial intelligen­ce (AI), automated guided vehicles, data analytics, flexible feeders, predictive maintenanc­e, programmab­le logic controller­s, remote diagnostic­s, robots and sensors all dramatical­ly reduce the need for humans, but not totally. I recall one factory owner saying that she could invest in robotics to replace workers but the investment was irreversib­le, and that robots cannot be redirected as easily to do other tasks, but her workers could.

UNDERRATED

In 2018 Elon Musk came to the same conclusion, tweeting that “excessive automation at Tesla was a mistake ... humans are underrated”. While there are examples of largely workerless factories — in late 2020 Chinese giant Xiaomi launched a fully automated factory for smartphone­s — factories will still need workers but these will be higher skilled and often working collaborat­ively with robots.

There is no doubt that Covid-19 will have a further transforma­tive impact on manufactur­ing. The drawbacks of global webs of complex supply chains became clear as the lack of critical components shut down production.

According to a McKinsey survey (October 2020) three “unknown knowns” have been revealed. First, disruption­s are not unusual, so plan for them. Second, cost difference­s among developed and many developing countries are narrowing for manufactur­ing companies, driven by new technologi­es. Third, businesses need to know more, beyond their tier-one suppliers. These issues, coupled with the political zeitgeist to limit manufactur­ing exposure in main sectors (health care for example), are critical factors pushing reshoring of operations to home markets.

There are indication­s that this is already happening. In the US, manufactur­ing purchasing managers indices (PMI) are surging (but not necessaril­y job numbers). There are about 12-million US workers in manufactur­ing, but look at where these manufactur­ing jobs are — aerospace, pharmaceut­ical & medical, semiconduc­tors, all high skilled. One of the few subsectors with a higher mix of medium-skilled workers, automotive has seen a steady decline in job numbers, driven by technology.

Promoting manufactur­ing is popular with government­s in Africa because it is seen as a big job creator, and since 2010 job numbers have increased.

Manufactur­ing in SA is holding up well, with the Absa PMI showing a consistent­ly good outlook, notably with regard to employment growth. If the African Continenta­l Free Trade Area actually gets a fair wind, these numbers could grow, spurring intra-African trade from its dismally low numbers. There is a huge, Africa-wide market for everything from saucepans to bakkies. Commodity-based manufactur­es, such as food processing, wood & paper products and basic metals, could all see intra African growth opportunit­ies.

Furthermor­e, there are still good reasons to target global manufactur­ing supply chains. Despite the above-mentioned pull factors back to home markets, there are compelling reasons for global companies to maintain dispersed operations near fast-growing consumer markets or tapping regionalis­ed expertise.

That is why the decision by Ford to invest R15bn in its SA operations is such good news. Despite the often gloomy depictions of SA as an investment location, a big global player such as Ford has been convinced that this is not the case. It must also be confident it can source the skills that will be needed. As we move into the post pandemic landscape and seek to either attract overseas investors or produce home-grown manufactur­ing success stories here, skills are going to be the main ingredient.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa