MEP Working for You
The Manufacturing Extension Partnership is a national network that provides local, personal service for manufacturers statewide.
BY SARAH ASP OLSON
In the early 1980s, American policymakers began to worry that Japan was using technology and innovative management to edge out American industry. The Japanese emerged as the world leader in industry and manufacturing, with current account surplus soaring from $5 billion in 1981 to $94 billion in 1987.
“By the end of the decade, Japan had massive overseas investments, huge trade surpluses and a global manufacturing network,” says Curtis Andressen in his book “A Short History of Japan.”
Editor's Note
Enterprise Minnesota’s mission is always to help small-and medium-sized manufacturers compete and grow profitably. We wanted you to know we also are part of a national network of Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) centers. As one of 59 centers in the United States, Enterprise Minnesota partners with manufacturing experts across the country to help Minnesota manufacturers achieve top-line, bottomline and employee growth using the most cutting edge methods. This article discusses the foundation and goal of MEP, as well as Enterprise Minnesota’s relationship to the national MEP network.
In comparison, between 1981 and 1987, the United States’ current account fell from a $6 billion surplus to a $144 billion deficit.
Japan’s rapid growth continued and job outsourcing increased due to cheaper overseas shipping costs. U.S. manufacturers also looked to reduce production costs. These factors called for a renewal of strength among domestic manufacturers. In 1988, Congress attempted to offer manufacturers the latest in technology through a Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP), hoping that better technology, better automation and better computer systems would lead to significant improvement.
MEP’s History
Funded by the U.S. Department of Commerce’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), MEP began as three pilot centers in South Carolina, Ohio and New York. Eventually, seven regional centers emerged with the initial objective, as outlined by the 1988 NIST MEP Statute, “to enhance productivity and technological performance in United States manufacturing through:
- the transfer of manufacturing technology and techniques developed at the Institute to Centers and, through them, to manufacturing companies throughout the United States;
- the participation of individuals from industry, universities, State governments, other Federal agencies and, when appropriate, the Institute in cooperative technology-transfer activities;
- efforts to make new manufacturing technology and processes usable by United States-based small- and medium-sized companies;
- the active dissemination of scientific, engineering, technical and management information about manufacturing to industrial firms, including small- and medium-sized manufacturing companies; and
- the utilization, when appropriate, of the expertise and capability that exists in Federal laboratories other than the Institute.”
In the early ’90s, however, MEP realized a high-tech overhaul was not working. Small- and medium-sized manufacturers were either not ready for or did not need high-tech solutions.
“The program was initially created with the idea of taking technology out of federal laboratories and giving it to small- and medium-sized manufacturers,” says Roger Kilmer, national MEP director. “We quickly learned that the sophistication of technology … coming out of the federal labs was a mismatch for small- and medium-sized manufacturers. We had to switch from how to push technology out to looking at the market demands: What were the needs of the manufacturers, and where could you best find the solutions to those needs?”
This realization gave rise to programs and processes aimed at helping companies increase productivity. It also prompted MEP to offer programs such as lean manufacturing—a continuous improvement process that gives manufacturers the tools to increase capacity and eliminate waste for faster and more productive operations.
“Those initial three and then seven regional centers learned that process improvement was going to play a much bigger role in productivity improvement than technology,” says John Connelly, Enterprise Minnesota’s director of product development and MEP’s Minnesota center director.
During the mid-’90s, MEP received additional funding from Congress, and MEP began to focus on how centers could better serve the needs of manufacturers in each state. This gave way to individual state centers rather than broader regional branches, a boon for each state’s manufacturers and an incentive for would-be partners to support MEP.
“The idea would be that each state would have its own manufacturing resource that supports manufacturers with the overall objective to improve their global competitiveness,” says Bob Kill, president and CEO of Enterprise Minnesota. “The MEP network helps centers develop and provide uniquely effective services that each could never develop or offer its clients if they were completely on their own. It’s a powerful partnership, bringing to small- and mediumsized manufacturers the competitive tools too often not accessible or affordable.”
MEP Today
Now MEP is a nationwide network that encompasses 59 independent centers throughout the United States and Puerto Rico. The network includes 1,600 experienced staff members who work alongside manufacturers to increase productivity, create business growth and seek out new business development opportunities.
When the centers were founded in each state, they developed in three general areas: 501(c)(3)s that relate to manufacturers much like an independent consulting firm; academically based systems that grow out of a strong university system in the state; and government agencies that are closely tied to operations within state and local government. Georgia, for example, developed its MEP center within the Georgia Tech University system.
“You go to Georgia, and Georgia Tech is king in that state. It has the brand recognition manufacturers recognize [and] trust,” Kilmer says.
When MEP first developed a center in Georgia, it was natural to piggyback onto an existing institution that already had a strong relationship with manufacturers.
“The program is not about building new franchises; it’s really relying on the local expertise,” Kilmer says. “What local [resources] do manufacturers recognize as folks that they trust and believe have the knowledge and expertise they need? In the case of Minnesota, there always was a strong consulting base there, so being able to partner [with] and bring in local consultants was the model that worked best in that situation.”
While the centers operate under the umbrella of the national organization—drawing resources and support— each is considered an independent nonprofit that exists to serve the specific needs of its state’s manufacturers.
From Kill’s perspective, both the independence and the network of the centers make for a stronger manufacturing base nationwide. “We are regularly talking about what [other centers] are seeing and working on,” Kill says. “[We ask]: ‘What’s going well for you and for your manufacturers? What can we borrow, and what can we learn from you?’ That is the power of the system.”
As centers share ideas, the network is strengthened, the manufacturing community is bolstered and the overall economy reaps the rewards. “MEP centers are essentially economic development organizations,” Connelly says.
“That means the underlying reason we exist is to make sure the economy gets better. We do that by focusing on manufacturing, because manufacturing has the most valuable jobs. It has some of the most significant impact on the economy as a wealth creator.”
Since its inception, MEP has proven to be a substantial wealth creator for the manufacturers it serves. In 2007, MEP clients reported more than $10 billion in sales, $1.4 billion in cost savings as a direct result of improved processes and waste reduction, and an impressive 57,079 jobs created or retained.
But the network’s commitment to excellence doesn’t stop when a job is completed. For every company served, each state center provides a service profile to the national center, which then employs a third-party resource to survey companies about their experiences with the state center. The results-centric model not only gives MEP centers valuable feedback about their performances, it also motivates centers to constantly think about how to improve and expand the services they offer.
“The focus on measurable results affects the way we think about what to offer and the way we bring it to companies— and the way companies look at us compared to other consulting resources,” Connelly says. “It’s the results orientation that I don’t believe is common in government programs.”
MEP in Minnesota
Of the approximately 8,000 manufacturers in Minnesota, Enterprise Minnesota has touched the majority, either with programs or services, according to Connelly. As Minnesota’s MEP center, Enterprise Minnesota delivered services to more than 200 companies in the last year. Of those, 137 were surveyed and reported about $51 million in total sales improvement, cost reduction and job retention.
By reaching out to the national network, Enterprise Minnesota can pick up tools and systems that will benefit its client base in Minnesota, such as Lean Enterprise.
“I hazard to say Enterprise Minnesota has delivered Lean to more manufacturing companies in Minnesota than any other resource,” Connelly says. “We do that because of the materials and the program provided through the MEP system, and because of the support the MEP program contributes to Enterprise Minnesota.”
Training Within Industry (TWI) is another example of Enterprise Minnesota’s collaboration with MEP centers around the country. TWI is an approach for developing supervisory skills that was initially implemented by a New York MEP center. It is currently deployed in six centers around the country, including Enterprise Minnesota, where, among other successes, it helped Alexandria-based Douglas Machine increase sales by $11.7 million, cut costs by $230,000 and create 32 jobs in 2007.
In recent years, MEP also has focused significant efforts on marketing and innovation, a theme that has trickled down to state centers through programs like Idea Engineering—a process designed to help companies innovate and think about new products they should be offering.
“The MEP system has gone a long way in the last two years to provide a system for managing innovation,” says Connelly. “Idea Engineering is a process [that helps] businesses understand the methods of innovating. … Without the MEP system, it wouldn’t be available to Minnesota manufacturers.”
Without that support, Litchfield-based IRD Glass would not have experienced $1 million in growth with an idea generated through Eureka! Winning Ways. The company, which participated in the program in early 2008, expects to see growth of up to $5 million over the next several years as a direct result of going through the program.
MEP’s Future
Efficiency has long been the focus of MEP, but in today’s climate, just being efficient is not enough. Manufacturers need to embrace technology, sustainability and a global outlook in order to stay ahead in the competitive marketplace. “[Manufacturers] still need to do Lean manufacturing, they need to be efficient and cost effective, but they need to look at what it means to be competitive, given the global nature of what manufacturing and supply chains are these days,” Kilmer says.
This is where technology comes back into play. In recent years, MEP has come full circle and is focusing more attention on helping companies obtain and use cutting-edge technologies. “It’s technology that can make a big difference in the manufacturing process and, more important, in new products that manufacturers can produce that would differentiate them from the competitors and make them more competitive,” Kilmer says.
For Enterprise Minnesota and the entire MEP system, that means helping manufacturers acquire the proper material and process technology to create faster, leaner and more profitable operations.
MEP recently implemented a national innovation marketplace. The program, which is housed on the national MEP Web site, aims to connect companies that invent technology and those that commercialize or sell it. “What we have found is typically those are not the same people, and they speak different languages,” Connelly says. “The inventor uses a very technical language and the commercializer uses a market/business opportunity language. The national innovation marketplace is building a bridge between them.”
With a strong foundation and a commitment to serving the needs of manufacturers around the country, the future of the MEP network is filled with possibilities for the nation’s manufacturers.
“We’ve gone from low-hanging fruit—the point solution of going in and helping with simple problems—to looking at a much more strategic view for the company: where they’re going and how they [can] get on a growth path,” Kilmer says.