A Prole of the Furniture Manufacturing Industry

A Prole of the Furniture Manufacturing Industry

Global Restructuring
Susan M. Walcott

A Prole of the Furniture Manufacturing Industry: Global Restructuring Copyright Business Expert Press, LLC, 2014. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any meanselectronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other except for brief quotations, not to exceed 400 words, without the prior permission of the publisher. First published in 2014 by Business Expert Press, LLC 222 East 46th Street, New York, NY 10017 www.businessexpertpress.com ISBN-13: 978-1-60649-656-5 (paperback) ISBN-13: 978-1-60649-657-2 (e-book) Business Expert Press Industry Proles Collection Collection ISSN: Forthcoming (print) Collection ISSN: Forthcoming (electronic) Cover and interior design by Exeter Premedia Services Private Ltd., Chennai, India First edition: 2014 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Printed in the United States of America.

Abstract
The furniture industry (NAICS 337) plays an important role in the U.S. economy as a bellwether for manufacturing through its utilization of a global production network. Types of furniture range from household to institutional, with particular growth in rms supplying medical and government-related commodities. The industry is highly responsive to fashion trends, but is partitioned into high, medium, and low cost segments that reveal different locational and market responses to changes. Recent developments indicate that the post-1980s migration of furniture manufacturing to offshore, low labor cost countries has stabilized and shows some faint signs of reshoring in the United States for high end customized and technologically intensive products utilizing the remaining embedded skilled labor and locally clustered industry components. Businesses that survived the recessionary creative destruction largely adopted lean manufacturing processes and took advantage of available lower cost equipment and buildings to upgrade their production practices, absorbing market from former competitors. New partnerships occurred with branch and headquarter relocations in Asia, along with cooperative supplier relationships with former U.S. and new foreign companies. Industry survivors adopted practices that could be highly instructive for other manufacturers challenged by globalization to grow stronger by increasing their adaptive capacity. An overview of the industry and its global production network includes the manufacturing technologies of each sector. Case studies of major U.S. manufacturers utilize site visits and interviews with representatives from these rms. Assessment of global competitors illustrate opportunities and challenges in these locations; lean manufacturing practices utilized by U.S. survivors show diversity and key components. Regulations impacting the industry include environmental protection restrictions and trade infringement. The conclusion considers the future of the industry in regional clusters.

Keywords
Furniture, global trade, competitive strategies, lean manufacturing, spatial x, global production network, value and supply chain, upholstered furniture, wood furniture/case goods, textiles, creative destruction, adaptive capacity, reshoring, hemispherization

Contents
List of Figures ....................................................................................... ix List of Tables........................................................................................ xi Chapter 1 Introduction .................................................................... 1 Chapter 2 Structure of the Furniture Industry ................................15 Chapter 3 How the Industry Operates ............................................29 Chapter 4 Industry Organization and Competition .........................41 Chapter 5 Market Forces Inside and Outside the Industry ..............61 Chapter 6 Regulation of the Furniture Industry, Domestic and Global ......................................................67 Chapter 7 Challenges and Opportunities for the Furniture Industry ..........................................................73 Notes ..................................................................................................77 References ............................................................................................79 Index ..................................................................................................81

List of Figures
Figure 1.1 Number of furniture manufacturing businesses, 20012011 ..........................................................................2 Figure 1.2 Employment in the furniture industry, 19902013 .............8 Figure 1.3 Exports and imports from 20032012.................................9 Figure 2.1 Percentage of household furniture segments by relative value, 2013 .......................................................16 Figure 2.2 Furniture and home furnishings store employment, in 1,000s............................................................................26 Figure 3.1 Regional distribution of U.S. furniture manufacturers, 2012 ..........................................................31 Figure 3.2 Percentages of U.S. furniture rms by leading state, 2012 .........................................................................32 Figure 4.1 Proportion of U.S. shipment value to Chinese annual furniture export value, 20092012, by U.S. $ billion ........55

List of Tables
Table 2.1 Annual Survey of Manufacturers, 20102011 (values in U.S. $1,000) .......................................................16 Table 4.1 Top U.S. Furniture Corporations, 20102011 ...................42 Table 4.2 Balance of U.S. Furniture Import-Export Destinations, 20082012, YTD Sept., $ mill...........................................52 Table 4.3 Destination of Furniture Exports and Imports by Country, 2010 ....................................................................53

Author Biography
Dr. Susan M. Walcott is a Professor at The University of North Carolina at Greensboro where she teaches courses in economic geography and the geography of Asia. Her research has focused on competitive strategies of industrial clusters in the United States and China and the globalization of specic industries including the U.S. furniture industry, which she has published on in articles and contracts. Dr. Walcott has a PhD in geography from Indiana University.

CHAPTER 1

Introduction
The furniture industry in the United States draws on abundant North American forest resources and skilled workers for its basic supplies, ourishing since the landing of the Mayower as commemorated by a company in Maine that traces its name from the rst pilgrim to purportedly touch the New World land. This book discusses the evolution of furniture from a local to a regional and now globally sourced, supplied, and marketed industry with an extensive network that continues to shift among clustered locations.1 Changes include how as well as where furniture is made, shipped, and sold. Subsequent chapters include a history of this important industry supplying basic as well as luxury commodities, and its shifting geography involved in creating and catering to the rise of both a manufacturing and craft-based middle class. The next chapter considers the supply chain that pulls components of manufacture and retail together. Examination of how the industry operates covers the role of furniture shows and other demand drivers, the impact of new technology reshaping where and how the industry functions, and a typical factory tour. The fourth chapter presents illustrative case studies of major rms operating in the United States, ranging from higher cost and more hand-crafted Made Here rms to highly manufactured foreign direct invested companies, including wood, upholstery, and textile corporations. Countries and strategies of major competitors also catering to the U.S. market are analyzed, along with policies to manage their market impact. The next two chapters consider issues involved in the global extension of this industry, concluding with a summary of the challengesand opportunitiespresented in a time of transition. The remainder of this introductory chapter presents themes such as lean manufacturing, re-shoring, and insourcing that permeate and illustrate points throughout the entire book. A particular focus of this book falls on the furniture industrys latest relocationsback to the United States in some cases, and to a broadening

A PROFILE OF THE FURNITURE MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY

range of overseas countries in othersas an overall reection of the changing geography of manufacturing. An expanding vocabulary regarding international business includes references to moves from outsourcing to reshoring (moving business back to the United States) and in-sourcing (utilizing U.S. rms for supplies). Glocalization refers to a globally located company seeking to appear as if it were a local/domestic rm, for example by emphasizing its services at the retail location. Originally, a Japanese business concept for taking initially local products to a wider market, the business model is modied to t local preferences and practices. A related popular jingo exhorts individuals to think local, act global. Corporations selling products in varied countries and to various ethnicities need to glocalize by adapting their portrayal to segmented markets. Hemispherization, or near-shoring, refers to the practice of moving a business from more distant overseas locations, particularly within Asia, to somewhere in the western hemisphere. This is usually done to reduce time and other uncertainties in shipments. These shifts are detailed later in this chapter. Interest lies with the industrys mirroring of the U.S. economy and the steady improvement in its domestic manufacturing picture since bottoming in 2009. Particularly since the year 2011, increasingly positive revenues, number of businesses, employment, exports as well as imports, wages, domestic demand, and a jump in 2012 housing starts indicate an improving domestic market as shown in Figures 1.11.3.2
30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0

Yr 01 Yr 02 Yr 03 Yr 04 Yr 05 Yr 06 Yr 07 Yr 08 Yr 09 Yr 10 Yr 11

Figure 1.1. Number of furniture manufacturing businesses in 20012011.

INTRODUCTION

A steady decline in the number of rms since the late 1980s, detailed in Chapter 3, dropped off more steeply along with the economy by 2009. The number of private furniture manufacturing rms dropped from 25,142 in the rst quarter of 2002, for example, to a recession recovery enhanced 18,251 by the third quarter of 2012, still a noticeable decrease. Similar corporate markers of economic health rose slowly but regularly in the following years. Credit goes in part to improvements in production processes such as lean manufacturing as well as an overall national economic recovery affecting home purchases that fueled furniture sales as well.3

Lean Manufacturing
The change agent winds of Schumpeters gales of creative destruction blew particularly hard in regions reliant on traditional industries, whether in the automotive rms of the Midwest or in the U.S. furniture industry. These production clusters share a signicant position involving older manufacturing regions and historically strong industries. The phenomenon of a slow rate of adoption and diffusion of new forms of work and production organization is similar in such areas, but it can also be inuenced by the introduction of ideas from, rather than the physical competitive presence of, foreign manufacturers. The reinvigoration of auto manufacturing in the Midwest occurred in rms that integrated and sustained these new adaptations, illustrated by the collapse of manufacturers who did not do so. The devastation of furniture manufacturing over the past two decades is a welldocumented occurrence, with the relocation to Asia of many activities linked to this process commonly attributed to labor cost savings, despite the lack of unionization throughout the generally low wage South where furniture manufacturing is concentrated. Far less well known is the Schumpeterian creative response to such economic destruction, discussed below. The major process model distinguishing surviving from unsuccessful furniture companies is clearly lean manufacturing. Major components discussed below include, in no particular order:
.

cooperative, consultative relationship between employees and managers, customers and manufacturer, and company and suppliers; customization through small batch sets and customer supplied material;

4
. .

A PROFILE OF THE FURNITURE MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY

. . .

quality over quantity; fast delivery of furniture to customer, and just in time delivery of components to factory; cell production model, with workers operating within a painted surface and supplies owing by delivery of supplies via water spider employees pushing carts; strict inventory management, with open storage designed so inventory in sight; white boards used to openly chart performance of teams, display problems, and group suggestions for improvements; wage rather than piece based pay, necessitating cross training; pull rather than push tasks, so work ows smoother with less pile up; implementation of suggestions decided by mixed teams of workers and managers.

The search for process innovations came from a sales-connected prot decline motivating imitation of a demonstrably successful technique, in the case of furniture leading to lean manufacturing, exemplied initially by the Toyota Production System (TPS) in the automobile industry. Adopters are heterogeneous (manufacturers, suppliers, transporters), and subsequent adaptation (hybridization) is a matter of selection by individual rms, reecting the local rms cultural environment. Implementations ability relies on the agility of the company (its absorptive capacity) and the commitment of its manager(s). The process improvement system of lean manufacturing (LM) seeks to focus the expenditure of resources on the creation of value for the end customer. Any other time/effort investment is to be eliminated, hence the term lean. The historical roots of TPS come from the Training within Industry program developed by the U.S. military and Britains Spitre production during WWII, before it traveled to Japan and bounced halfway back to the United States TPS was rst applied in the United States at the United Motors Manufacturing plant, a joint venture between Toyota and General Motors. The Toyota systems uniqueness is its primary focus on developing human resources as the foundation of its technical systema key factor occasionally overlooked by adopters since changing the corporate culture is harder than instituting new procedures. Thorough implementation usually

INTRODUCTION

takes several years at best. Toyotas technical system is often pictured as a house with stability and standardization as the foundation, with specic strategies such as just-in-time (JIT, meaning delivery of assembly components as they are needed) serving as pillars to support the roof and ultimate target of customer satisfaction. Each of these major pieces of the technical system uses the problem solving skills of the employees to identify and eliminate nonvalue activity, or wastes. The classic Seven Wastes are motion, waiting, conveyance, correction, over processing, overproduction, and inventory. An eighth waste is often identied as not utilizing human talent. The stated underlying purpose of the Toyota system is to improve humanity through a product. The main values needed by companies and managers to achieve this are respect for people and continuous improvement. These values are used in the TPS system to yield a higher quality product with optimum reduction of time, cost, and effort. In the TPS model, management practices are to support the role of labor on the shop oor. Workers are incentivized by recognition and implementation of their suggestions for input into the design, development, and improvement of product and process technology. Kaizen is the Japanese word frequently used to describe the constant search for improvement. Other TPS practices include value stream mapping from suppliers through the production system to promote a continuous ow, reduce the need for inventory, and placing a premium on the maintenance of standardized work to achieve quality level targets. Common components of lean systems include job rotation to foster interest and ability while ensuring that work is accomplished with minimal/nonexistent delays, multiskilling (also called crosstraining) of workers to increase their exible implementation, small group problem solving to draw on various skills for insights, decentralized decision making, and increased overall employee participation. Most research on TPS implementation concerns auto and electronics sector rms, with a sliding scale of successful adoption between segments of these two industries. A TPS/LMS priority focuses on optimizing the interrelated ow of production, ideas, and communication. One form of this is kanban, a visual communication method used to trigger replenishment of parts internally and from suppliers. A system of colored cards or labels is often used to indicate the schedule of the logistical chain ow that is being managed.

A PROFILE OF THE FURNITURE MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY

Pull, or building to order (custom) rather than target matching push techniques are also part of the TPS concept. Creating and maintaining a long-term relationship with suppliers, who are also integrated into this process either internally or to implement JIT, is a related aspect of LM, a goaloriented system that lends itself to a variety of tools adapted as means to an end. Toyotas Lean Mentor (sensei, or teacher) system serves as a way of supplying experts to provide advice, where and when requested, on implementing TPS and related processes. Direct American roots of TPS can be found in the production system related admonitions of Benjamin Franklin, Frank Gilbreth, Frederick Taylor, and Henry Ford. Lean as a form of economic organization takes place within varying social contexts, within which individual managers need to operate as supporters of the oor workers. Various strands of literature emphasize different aspects of lean, from cost control to speed enhancement and the creation of a participatory production culture focused on teamwork to enhance quality; leanness therefore ranges from a set of techniques to socio-technical arrangements. Three stages of adoption include transitional slimming of the organization, achievement of leanness as a conclusion including suppliers as well as producers, and leanness as an ongoing management process to sustain the organization. Promoting and achieving leanness involves a complex process of persuading workers, managers, and occasionally owners to adopt this thorough going system. The key factor in the success of TPS models lies with giving workers respect and responsibilities (genba, or people as the core) not through top-down authority imposition. This pluralistic relationship can be fatally damaged by the usual American response of cost minimization to combat competitive pressure. The lean method is seen as globally transferable since it can be modied to t particular contexts at the rm level. Locally sensitive managers need to pay explicit attention to hybridization as a learning process. As stated by Porto and Smith (2003), [o]rganizations most successful at transformationdesigned tools that t their specic needs.Lean tools may be the visible portion of a lean transformation but they are dependent on the more invisible foundation of a culture that supports new ways of thinkinga foundation of a people-based culture: respect, responsibility for problem solving, and total involvement with improvement.4 To summarize, LM/TPS key goals are to:

INTRODUCTION
. . . . . . . . .

Shorten production time Increase employee problem solving Increase employee self-directed teamwork Improve product/ service quality Improve work process standardization Reduce work in process errors & rework Improve work ow Push-pull cards identify production problems Incorporate user feedback in innovation process.

Steps toward application of LM in the furniture industry usually begin with a consultant who works with a chosen production unit or targeted process to study, transform, and exemplify the system improvement. Steps (literally in the case of a worker) are placed on a chart using colored lines to indicate ows involved. The distance and number are used to pinpoint places where time and effort waste occurs and can be eliminated. A workspace, for example, can then be compressed so all the supplies that a worker needs are readily at hand, and a yellow line drawn around to delimit the work area. A group of workers (sometimes referred to as water spiders since they hop from station to station) is deployed with carts carrying items needed by production employees so work does not stop or experience delays due to a supply shortage. Pegboards holding tools and supplies are often used as an organized, close by visual storage space. Another characteristic sign of LM implementation is a large white board, used at the daily morning and afternoon meetings to list teams and their accomplishments/needs. Employees are encouraged to assist with offering suggestions for improvements. As a highly visible display surface, white boards are also used to post inventory data (e.g., how much expensive leather of different colors is utilized in production over a certain time period). Workers are encouraged to write improvement suggestions at any time, and authors of adopted practices are photographed along with their innovation and the picture posted in a visible spot. Companies are encouraged to supply lockers for workers to store their belongings (so only work material is at their station) and an eating area so food consumption occurs in a designated place, as organized as all other specialized activities. Yellow oor lines are tightly drawn around storage bins. They function as fast visual references if excessive inventory spills over the carefully measured storage compartment.

A PROFILE OF THE FURNITURE MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY

800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr Yr 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13

Figure 1.2. Employment in the furniture industry, 19902013.

Figure 1.2 demonstrates the accompanying gradual increase in employment over the recession recovery/lean, adoption time period, with long term national and global competitive consequences detailed in Chapter 3. Although it is not clear in the chart, there was a slight but not insignicant uptick in employment from 20122013 of 350,000 to 351,000 according to projections by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The more signicant and unfolding story associated with re-shoring moves is the underlying economics that make such a move attractive. Calculations reect not only the diminished wage differential between China and the U.S. but also the investment in upscale technology and machinery reected in increased productivity with fewer workers needed to produce more goods at lower cost overall.

Re-shoring and In-sourcing

The hemorrhaging of businesses hopping overseas has slowed, with some shifting in overseas sourcing countries and some increasing activity domestically. Causes and consequences for the United States industry are explored in the following chapters. A sign of the improvement in housing starts and disposable income is reected in the rise of both exports of furniture from and imports of furniture to the United States (Figure 1.3). Note the difference in values in the Y-axis, however, as imports remain a factor higher than the value of exports. Less visible in the numbers but importantly underlying them is the difference in quality represented by the

INTRODUCTION

25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0

6 Exports

10 Imports

12

Figure 1.3. Exports and imports from 20032012.

higher price exports, the more mass manufactured so less expensive imports, and the custom niche production for the domestic U.S. market that also improved at an accelerated pace since 2011. The export trend indicates effects of a weaker U.S. currency and diminished global demand from major developed world customers, discussed in Chapter 3. The above gures illustrate a new twist in the tale of companies shifting locations around the globe in search of ever lower cost (usually wagerelated) advantage in a less-skilled industry: the increase in furniture related business done in the United States. Several recent studies indicate the increase in manufacturing and service-related business such as furniture design and sales re-shoring and rehiring in the same areas where it was strong a decade ago in Mississippi and North Carolina, according to the Boston Consulting Group. Main points to remember regarding re-shoring movement include the following triggers for rms considering switching business out of China:
.

Increases in the cost of oil push increases in the cost of shipping across the Pacic. Since the downturn in 2008, shipping rms have been taking boats out of business (putting them in mothballs) to avoid expensive trips with less than full loads, particularly relatively empty backhauls from the United States to Asia since far fewer goods ow in that direction but ships must complete the round trip to pick up Asian

10

A PROFILE OF THE FURNITURE MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY

manufactures. Shipping rms subsequently raise rates, shift schedules, and remain tough to forecast as they opt for exibility on their partand uncertainty on the part of customers. The gradual and continuing rise in the value of the Chinese yuan currency in relation to the U.S. dollar makes exports more expensive from China relative to other locations. The previous surge in population from rural inland areas migrating to major Chinese east coast factory locations largely in the Pearl River delta region has led to:  tapering off of migration since those who could leave already left, and disadvantages of migration now more apparent;  more companies in clustered locations competing for same worker pool, which tends to drive up cost of workers and make them more willing to switch jobs;  workers becoming more afuent, demanding higher pay, fewer hours, and more benets. Intellectual property infringements such as copying U.S. furniture designs hurt competitiveness in an industry where design is very important. Some Chinese factories prohibit visitors to protect themselves from this risk, while others appear to utilize design elements as original equipment manufacturer (OEM) suppliers from their contracted customers. Regulations in foreign countries remain opaque, while enforcement remains disadvantageous for foreigners, according to anecdotal evidence.

Main considerations attracting business activity back to the United States include:
.

. .

Still an adequate number of appropriately skilled workers in locations where furniture was manufactured previously, especially in upholstery. U.S. recession increased number of unemployed workers willing to work for relatively modest wages. United States and some states offering incentives for employers. Market for furniture larger than in China and growing stronger as recession ending.

INTRODUCTION
. .

11

Equipment available at good price. Manufacturing process improved with move to lean procedures and highly efcient machinery, lowering costs with fewer workers needed. Closer to market means:  quicker delivery competitive advantages, and  ability to maintain control over quality during construction.

Main considerations for business looking at relocating to non-China and non-U.S. locations:
.

environmental regulations in United States still strong and impact furniture processes. wages still higher than in many other countries (South America, Southeast Asia).

Examples of re-shoring efforts include both successful (so far) and less successful efforts. North Carolinas Lincolnton Furniture Company, in the town of the same name, eventually abandoned its attempted re-starting. The owner who opened the business in 2012 had sold it in 1997 to another U.S. manufacturer, who gradually shifted an increasing amount of work overseas until closing the plant. In the interim, furniture industry wage rates in China rose throughout the decade from a little over 50 cents/hour to approach $3/hour, and U.S. consumers were reconsidering the trade-off in time to delivery and quality. Productivity efciencies achieved by utilizing highly efcient machinery also made Made in the U.S. more potentially protable than in the labor-intensive past. When Lincolnton eventually closed, it signaled the nality by selling off its equipment. Stanleys youth furniture division in Robbinsville continues its efforts to increase manufacture of relatively high-end childrens furniture in the United States Given previous issues with foreign laxity in safety and chemical compounds, Stanley hopes to link the Made in the USA label to parental willingness to pay more for peace of mind. Stanley shuttered but maintained its plant intact during its hiatus, thus it was easier to resuscitateor sell if that is the ultimate decision. Vaughn Bassett successfully pursued the same strategy. Though still rare to see a new company opening in the United Statesor a former company unshutteringmore common

12

A PROFILE OF THE FURNITURE MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY

sights are existing companies hiring more workers to meet the demand uptick, or a merged company seeing more activity as the new management increases its U.S. business. This is particularly the case on the upholstery side, which continues to thrive in the United States by utilizing skilled craftsmen for custom work. An example of reverse shoring is Chinese company Samsons purchase of U.S. company Craftmaster, whose upholstery business it subsequently returned to the United States. From early 2010 to early 2012, a Boston Consulting Group study showed that wage rates in China climbed by 15%, while shipping costs rose precipitously commensurate with the price of fuel and the reduced shipping capacity due to mothballing from demand fall-off during the recession. These factors put furniture, along with six other sectors including electronics and transportation goods, most likely manufacturers to return to the United States. Almost half (48%) of the largest U.S. manufacturers (sales in excess of $1 billion) indicated that they planned to reshore. Indications are that this is happening very gradually in the case of furniture, and more in some components (upholstery) than in others (case goods). The tipping point for business owners is a 1015% differential that makes it worthwhile to begin shifting at least some of their businesswhether manufacturing, which requires more sunk costs or more mobile design, logistics or marketing functionsback to the higher skill, higher pay control headquarters in the United States according to a 2012 Harvard Business School study. Hemispherization to a closer low cost country such as Mexico is attractive by a wage rate comparison, but violence, corruption, and low quality infrastructure impacts considerations of manufacturing relocation for fragile furniture, other than low skill, low pay, and less perishable upholstery processes. Due in part to its position on the low cost end, Mississippi joined North Carolina in losing large numbers of furniture manufacturing jobs in the past seven years alone. Mississippi State University hosted a Re-shoring Initiative to promote the overall competitive price of manufacturing in the United States, considering the costs outlined above and the changing wage rates. A study purportedly showed that 25% of manufacturers who left the state are considering returning (2012). Another study done by the Hackett Group found that up to 20% of offshore manufacturing is liable to re-shore by 20142015 for the same shifting cost calculations. A noted columnist for

INTRODUCTION

13

the leading furniture industry publication indicated his knowledge of at least ve companies looking for a U.S. expansion site in early 2013. A question remains whether the practice of foreignparticularly Chineserms purchasing U.S. furniture makers and suppliers will lead to the opening, re-opening or maintaining a plantor just brand name acquisition as has happened previously. The giant Hong Kong trading company of Li and Fong, for example, are reputedly interested in adding a furniture brand to their portfolio of diverse companies, but not in order to manage one in the United States as much as take advantage of current low interest rates and low selling price for such rms. While the Chinese government encourages its companies to go abroad in the form of outward foreign investment, it is a policy combining the opportunity to learn foreign operating techniques with ways to balance the currency ow and spread risk. This strategy is an acknowledgement of the major shifts underway in this dynamic reconguring manufacturers, currently adjusting to new ways of production and marketing on a global scale.