A week ago I was presented with the blogging ranter's worst nightmare – a challenge to either do something about the problems plaguing manufacturing – or shut up. I have taken the challenge to heart, and the first step has been to pen an article encapsulating my stockpile of issues that I intend to send to quite a few people – 435 Congressmen and women, and 100 Senators, for starters. I will be rolling out a few other tricks after that with the goal of making as much noise as I can until we can get someone's attention concerning the seemingly insurmountable institutional obstacles to lean we all face.
I suffer from no illusions here. If you have never written to your Senator or Congressman you should just for the fun of it. You can write to him and tell him that his dog is ugly and his mother is a witch and you will receive a standard form letter in reply thanking you for your support, telling you how much he is doing to save your district, the nation and the world, and most important, where to send a campaign contribution.
But who knows, with 535 recipients, 99.8% of them can throw it in the trash and that still means one person actually read it. I have more to do after this, but the starting point seems to me to be to stake out my position – hence the article. Everything else can be built from that.
Where you come in is that I would appreciate all of the editorial comment I can get before it goes out. The readers of Evolving Excellence have never been shy – especially with constructive criticism. So please, let me have as much input as the spirit moves you to give. And feel free to share it with anyone you think might have a contribution to make to the cause.
You can read the article by clicking on THIS LINK, which will take you to my web site where you can download it. It is called The Hollow American Economy.
Give me your feedback by commenting here, sending me an email, or through my web site. I really do need the help. I am far from having all of the answers to our manufacturing decline and the challenges to becoming lean global leaders, but if what I know gets added to what all of you know, we have a lot of collective knowledge to bring to bear on the issues.
Thanks for the help – looking forward to the comments.
Christopher Mahan says
I took the liberty to upload the MS word document, upload it to my google docs account, and publish it as html.
see: http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=avpv9hzn3tx_202dzdmx2gh
The two-column format didn’t survive the googlism, but the text is otherwise unchanged.
I will review the document tomorrow and put my critique at that time.
Immo Huneke says
Bill, as a reader in the UK I find your article both illuminating and deeply worrying. The specific instances and people may be different, but the overall trend is the same here. We have a lame duck administration at present and that is not likely to change any time soon.
Before you submit the article, I strongly urge you to get someone to proof-read it for typos that occasionally distort your meaning, e.g. “if” for “of” and the like.
Harley says
You are an optimist.
You wrote: “But who knows, with 535 recipients, 99.8% of them can throw it in the trash and that still means one person actually read it.”
Andy Keson says
Bill,
Great article, very well written. It would be great if all of our leaders read it, but also, the American Public needs to read it. They need to see the truth from somebody that is not in government or big media.
My critique would be to make it more internet-friendly and let it spread virally.
Kathleen says
I can’t imagine how it should be done but there should be a cut to the chase version. Regular readers are familiar with the themes but others (who’d read it virally) are not. Which reminds me, I suggest amending the document with links to previous posts on EE.
The paper deserves more attention paid to solutions.
Lastly, seek common cause with kindred detailing the costs of coercion and opportunity costs. http://bit.ly/A34Ma
Ralph Bernstein says
Bill – I am by background a journalist. I read your letter, and speaking as a writer and editor, my advice to you is: Edit it. Most people, and particularly not politicians, will read all, or even most, of a 9-page letter. Boil it down to your main conclusions and recommendations, and put them on one page, two at the most – like an A3 report. (Include the rest as an accompanying white paper, if you want.)
Also, if you want a positive response, you might want to tone down the attacks on political parties. For example, a Republican congressman will not react well to the statement that his party is bought and paid for by Wall Street.
Good luck.
Bryan Coats says
Great article, not just opinions; comments with data to back them up. The data confirms what I have believed to be true for years, now I have a single source for the data to support. I will definitely share this with others I know.
Cons:
2-col. format difficult to read w/o printing (waste?).
9 pages too long for a government official to read
Provide a one-page executive summary with all major points and attach a slimmed-down (“lean out the verbage) version so that those who want more ellaboration can read for mor understanding.
Susan Robinson says
Bill,
Your article is a valuable critique of the current state of the American Economy, but I think it does not achieve your stated purpose – to offer recommendations that will actually DO SOMETHING ABOUT the problems. You state the problems eloquently, but I would offer you the challenge to re-read your article and count the number of actual SOLUTIONS you offer. Your “turning it around” section focuses on ways in which we can explore our problems and offers a short list, too short I think, of some very good questions we should be asking. As a regular reader of Evolving Excellence, I suggest that you’ve got some good answers to the questions you’ve posed, but you never give them in the article. The failure to give those answers turns your well-reasoned argument into a rant. I would request that you take the risk, and expand your recommendations. Instead of telling us only what should be changed, tell us how – at least give us your ideas. Give us more examples of successes and suggest to us how these can be duplicated, multiplied, and adapted to permeate the American economy and change our course. And give us more of your vision of what we can be.
On a small matter, I agree with the proofreading suggestion made by one of your other readers. You’ve got some typos.
Thank you for sharing this article.
Nathaniel says
Ditto the last two comments. It needs an executive summary or a fact sheet outline as the first page. I’m unemployed, and I’ll be lucky to read the whole document….
Steve Pfeiffer says
Bill,
As a regular reader, I have to commend you for taking a big first step towards getting an “audience” with hopefully more than just one member of Congress. It takes a lot of nerve to put your writing out there for everyone to read and critique.
I would like to suggest the following (which will mostly be in sync with other previous comments):
1 – Give it a thorough editing to reduce the harsh tone relating to Wall Street, Washington and the political parties. You bring up some excellent, data and logic driven points that should not be lost in amongst what could be perceived as a rant.
2 – Cut the length without losing the facts and solution focus. As several previous readers pointed out it is extremely long and it will be better received if it is unemotional and to the point.
3 – Elaborate on the solutions — up to and including specific examples of companies that have been successful and how those in government can influence the replication of these successes.
Kevin Carson says
With luck, your article will at least be taken seriously by people like Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, etc. Unfortunately, nobody in Congress listens to them.
Christopher Mahan says
I let a few hours pass.
I think too that while not too long, it could be better edited, and made more readable.
I also agreed that it’s light on the “what do we do about it” front.
Jan Jochmann says
Bill,
First, let me say, that I am too young and living too far from USA to comment the correctness of the content of your letter.
But I do think, that you did a good job writing up this letter, because I can feel a sense of urgency from it, which could make people stop and think for a while and discuss the case.
I agree with the above comments, especially:
– letter is unconvenient to read on computer, especially laptop (because of 2 columns)
– it is quite a long reading (but still interesting) – a summary in the beginning could make it better
– you can feel a bit of “abusing” tone from it, which is in contrast to “lean thinking and management” (let’s look for what is the problem and not who’s fault is is)
I will add only a small correction to the content (you mention the Eastern European countries in the letter) – I live in Slovakia (which was part of Czechoslovakia before) and:
– it is 20 years from the fall of Soviet union and not 30
– I think saying that the economies of these countries is not much better now in comparison to “soviet era” is far away from truth
– although the wages of EE countries are still much lower than in the west, the standard of living is quickly improving
– Western europe-EE countries is not the exact case like the USA-China example, because geaographically you are still in Europe and close to your customers (and in the case of Slovakia and many other EE countries also a member of European union)
BUT, although above mentioned, EE countries need to understand that the cheap labor is just a short-term advantage and there should be a plan on what to build the future of the economy. We can not wait until the big companies (“the not truly-lean ones) pack the stuff and move somewhere else.
Anyway, you did a good job and I look forward to see how this will go on.
Best regards
Jan
Brendan O'Malley says
Most of the comments are right on:
– Too long, needs editing. For example, the “productivity” issue, while absolutely valid, is somewhat repetitive.
– Too much of a rant in places; national leaders need to be persuaded that they need to change from years of thinking in a particular way. Attacking them as stupid and corrupt is not very persuasive!
– Need much more focus on solutions. In particular, fundamental change will only come from adopting different accounting standards. If the whole economy is based on maximising profit, then ensure that the method of calculating profit drives the right (or at least better) behaviour.
– Watch the typos. They imply lack of care and professionalism.
– Finally, I think you are highlighting just about the most important issue facing developed Western nations today – not just the USA. Keep up the good work.
Brendan O’Malley – CEO Episensor
Chui says
Too abstract.
Instead, you should talk about American Apparel, and contrast it with GM.
Politically, the motor industry is a poisoned chalice for politicians. I doubt there is much will to change the state of affairs.
However the rest of the manufacturing could benefit from improving manufacturing knowhow.
Even if arguments of economic utility were correct, and that the economy benefits if jobs were exported, you should point out that the inequality that arises between those who can buy things cheaper, and those who do not have work is not an abstract concept. Idleness and unemployment leads to disgruntlement and crime, and the loss of a promise of an opportunity for all.