Improved Outlook? French Manufacturing Competitiveness Radar 2014/2015. Paris, March 2015

Transcription

1 Improved Outlook? French Manufacturing Competitiveness Radar /2015 Paris, March 2015

2 Roland Berger's manufacturing Competitiveness Radar We are proud to present you the third edition of our survey on French plants competitiveness. The role of manufacturing in advanced economies is changing. The current survey was conducted between September and November, involving more than 100 plant managers and representing a broad range of French industries. The survey captures prevailing trends on six topics: Evolution of French manufacturing competitiveness since 2012 and its outlooks for 2015 Profit margin levels Typical profile of competitive and non competitive plants Keys levers to increase competitiveness Appropriation by French plant managers of Industry 4.0 Innovation 2

3 survey results are based on contributions from French plant managers across a wide scope of industries Number of respondents per industry Sample portrait Metal working and mineral products Agri-business & household equipment Survey responses from more than 100 plants managers Process industries (wood, paper, glass, building) Chemistry & plastics Automotive & transportation Mechanical industry Pharmacy & perfumery Editing & printing Electric & electronic equipment and components Textile industry % of surveyed plants are based in France 18% are French subsidiaries of international firms 58% of surveyed plants have more than 250 FTEs, while 21% have less than 100 FTEs. 15% have more than 1,000 FTEs Most industry segments were covered by the analysis Source: Roland Berger Manufacturing Competitiveness Radar Survey 3

4 French plants' outlook is improving Product innovation as a key issue Limited progress in Industry 4.0 awareness To p e x e c u t i v e s u m m a r y % of respondents consider themselves as competitive (vs. 78% in ), and 63% of respondents expect their competitiveness to improve in 2015 (vs. only 56% in ). Margin levels were stable in and outlooks for 2015 are positive. Smaller plants improved their competitiveness in although larger plants still are on average more competitive. The level of capital is not discriminatory between competitive and non competitive plants. Less competitive plants export less but are more exposed to international competition, a result already underlined by our past surveys Labor costs still poses the highest challenge to improve competitiveness, but to a more limited extent than in and Product innovation and R&D are other hot issues on which plant managers want to improve themselves. Mastering industrial processes and operational efficiency are even more important, but plant managers perception is that current performance is already satisfactory. Competitive plants still have limited awareness of Industry 4.0 concepts although some impact is expected from cyber-security, radio frequency identification, robotics and plants super-connections. Competitive plants innovate more and appear also more active on their product portfolio. Reflecting the increasing attention on product innovation, Marketing and R&D managers are getting more involved on portfolio reviews. 4

5 France may further destroy manufacturing jobs in the coming years automation playing key role Creation & destruction of jobs in manufacturing and services in France [ 2023; thousands] -50t manufacturing jobs +837t jobs in services Active Population Growth Destruction of Manufacturing Jobs Creation of Manufacturing Jobs Destruction of Jobs in Services Creation of Jobs in Services Additional Job seekers Source: INSEE, OFCE, COE-Rexecode, Roland Berger 5

6 French industries will be impacted differently depending on their added value and their addressable markets Added Value Differentiated products & services (technological advance, knowhow, brands) Intellectual services with strong added value Manufacturing specialty products Plastic and industry Services that cannot be offshored/delocalized Luxury Aeronautics & equipments Pharmacy Agri-business Public services Electricity Production Automotive Commoditized products & services Construction Mining and raw material extraction Services to indivuals and low added value businesses Administration Local Markets (need for proximity or limited transportation capacity) Agriculture Basic industries Global Markets (dematerialized service ou strong transportation capacity) Adressable Markets Bubble size proportional to size in French economy Service Manufacturing Source: Roland Berger 6

7 1. French competitiveness stabilized in Do you consider your plant as Very competitive 12% 12% 13% Competitive 63% 66% 64% Not competitive 25% 22% 22% ) Plants with more than 10 employees Source: Roland Berger Manufacturing Competitiveness Radar Survey, Trendeo, INSEE 7

8 1. The outlook of French plants competitiveness is improving % of respondents considering that their competitiveness Very Competitive plant Competitive plant Not Competitive plant 2012 has Improved vs % 39% 15% was going to improve actually improved 54% 73% 4% 34% 25% 52% was going to improve actually improved 42% 80% 49% 52% 56% 73% 2015 will improve 77% 59% 68% Source: Roland Berger Manufacturing Competitiveness Radar Survey 8

9 2. Most plant managers expect profit margins to increase in 2015 Still 20% of respondents in distress % of respondents considering that their profit margin level. Competitive / Very competitive Not competitive TOTAL In vs. has decreased has remained stable 36% 33% 23% 32% 35% 30% has increased 31% 45% 35% From to 2015 will decrease will remain stable 23% 39% 14% 27% 20% 35% will increase 41% 59% 45% Source: Roland Berger Manufacturing Competitiveness Radar Survey 9

10 3. Smaller plants seem to perform slightly better, but size not a strong differentiating factor Plants considering themselves competitive or very competitive, function of sales Plants with sales < 50 M EUR Plants with sales > 50 M EUR 71% + 12 pts 83% -2% 81% 82% - 3 pts 79% -5% 75% Source: Roland Berger Manufacturing Competitiveness Radar Survey 10

11 3. Share of exports in sales is increasing but no clear correlation between competitiveness and level of exports Share of export sales on total plant sales Very competitive Competitive Not competitive 42% 41% 45% 41% 38% 46% 39% 36% 49%

12 3. however, less competitive plants suffer more from international competition Competitive landscape - % of non French first competitors Competitive or Very competitive Not competitive 60% + 7 pts 67% 68% 78% - 4 pts 74% 86% Source: Roland Berger Manufacturing Competitiveness Radar Survey 12

13 3. Competitive plants do not necessarily invest more Average investments (% of sales) per competitiveness level Competitive and very competitive plants Not competitive plants TOTAL 5.5% 4.9% 4.8% 5.4% 4.6% 5.6% 5.5% 4.8% 5.0% Source: Roland Berger Manufacturing Competitiveness Radar Survey, 13

14 4. Improving industrial processes and operational efficiency more critical than labor costs Possible CICE effect % of respondents considering the criteria either critical or very critical vs. Critical issues Important issues Secondary issues = = = = Industrial processes Operational efficiency Raw material purchases Labor qualification Supply chain Sales force Manufacturing flexibility Product innovation Labor costs R&D Energy costs Group size Plant size Marketing Public support Local infrastructures Local network of same industry actors 16% 35% 45% 69% 66% 61% 56% 54% 91% 91% 84% 82% 81% 80% 79% 73% 71% Source: Roland Berger Manufacturing Competitiveness Radar Survey, 14

15 4. Labor costs still too high Increasing share of innovation and R&D as critical productivity mismatch Competitiveness mismatch Critical issues Important issues Secondary issues vs = = Labor costs 34% Product innovation 23% R&D 17% Operational efficiency 14% Sales force 13% Public support 12% Supply chain 10% Manufacturing flexibility 9% Industrial processes 8% Raw material purchases 7% Marketing 5% Energy costs 4% Labor qualification 2% Local network of same industry actors 1% Group size -8% Plant size -13% Local infrastructures -15% Rationale This chart measures the difference (or mismatch) between the number of respondents considering a criteria critical and those regarding themselves as actually competitive on this criteria. Source: Roland Berger Manufacturing Competitiveness Radar Survey 15

16 4. Competitive plants are more worried about innovation and R&D than just labor costs % of respondents considering themselves competitive on a criteria considered critical 1) Labor costs Product innovation R&D Supply chain 28% 19% 40% 27% 67% 55% 50% 24% 63% 56% 49% 41% 74% 67% 71% 64% Manufacturing flexibility Raw material purchases Labor qualification Operational efficiency 76% 63% 74% 59% 77% 67% 81% 64% 83% 85% 81% 77% 88% 78% 82% 59% Competitive plants Not competitive plants 1) Number of respondents considering themselves competitive over number of respondents considering the criteria as critical, amongst all respondents of their respective "competitiveness category" Source: Roland Berger Manufacturing Competitiveness Radar Survey 16

17 5. Our manufacturing survey updates French plant managers awareness on Industry 4.0 Overview of a selection of Industry 4.0 key concepts [selection] Cybersecurity Big data Cloud computing Augmented reality (AR) Robotics > Technologies, processes and standards (ISO 27001) enabling organizations to protect computers, networks and data from unauthorized access > Refers to data so large, complex or rapid that it is difficult to process using traditional database and software techniques > The capacity to share computing resources typically through the Internet - rather than having local servers or personal devices to handle applications > Real-world environment digitally enhanced by computer-generated sensory input such as sound, video, graphics or GPS data > Technology dealing with the design, construction, operation, and application of robots in order to improve productivity, product quality and worker safety Rapid prototyping Radio frequency identification (RFID) Plants super-connection 3D printing > Group of techniques using in particular 3D computer aided design data to rapidly and efficiently turn innovative ideas into scale models > Automatic identification method, relying on storing and remotely retrieving data using devices called RFID tags or transponders > Connection of machines, work pieces and systems, to create intelligent networks along the entire value chain that can control each other autonomously > Also called additive manufacturing. A process of making a threedimensional solid object of virtually any shape from a digital model > Allows customizable, one-off production with virtually no waste Source: Roland Berger Manufacturing Competitiveness Radar Survey 17

18 5. Competitive plants do not necessarily have a better awareness of Industry 4.0 concepts Industry 4.0 key concepts overview Understanding and expected impact Amongst competitive plants Amongst non competitive plants Have a good / very good understanding Qualify topic as to be impactful / very Have a good / very good understanding Qualify topic as to be impactful / very Cybersecurity 86% 61% 73% 73% RFID 55% 35% 77% 50% Robotique 50% 44% 36% 36% 3D printing 46% 19% 55% 27% Cloud computing 34% 11% 27% 27% Big data 31% 21% 27% 36% Plants superconnection 30% 26% 36% 32% Réalité augmentée 27% 15% 23% 14% Source: Roland Berger Manufacturing Competitiveness Radar Survey 18

19 5. Industry 4.0 "hot topics" are cyber-security, robotics and radio frequency identification (RFID) Industry 4.0 key concepts overview Understanding and expected impact Well understood 88% -4 83% 85% % 69% -9 60% 48% % 52% % 62% % 58% % 35% -9 26% Cybersecurity Robotics RFID Plants super-connection Big data 3D printing Cloud computing Augmented reality Impactful 61% +2 63% 36% +3 39% 22% -1 21% 58% % 22% -7 15% 23% +5 27% 22% +2 24% 15% -1 15% Cybersecurity RFID 3D printing Robotics Cloud computing Plants super-connection Big data Augmented reality Source: Roland Berger Manufacturing Competitiveness Radar Survey 19

20 6. Competitive plants work more intensively their product portfolio With focus on innovation and renewal Non competitive plants Competitive plants Share of sales generated by products launched after 1 st January less than 10% of plant sales between 10% and 25% of plant sales 23% 68% 58% 25% more than 25% of plant sales 9% 16% Frequency of product portfolio review less than once a year 23% once a year 55% several times a year 14% at least once a month 9% 28% 23% 35% 14% Source: Roland Berger Manufacturing Competitiveness Radar Survey 20

21 6. Marketing and R&D managers are key managers to be involved on product portfolio reviews Portfolio review [percentage of respondents] Who is involved What decisions are taken Marketing Top management R&D 89% 83% 78% Improve efficiency and processes Invest or not 75% 75% Finance 68% Develop new products 69% Sales Manufacturing Supply chain 66% 64% 64% Allocate production between plants Abandon products or clients 62% 57% Management control 57% Adapt pricing 53% Source: Roland Berger Manufacturing Competitiveness Radar Survey 21

22 6. Organization of R&D and Marketing (in site/off-site/centralized) does not appear as a relevant criteria for performance Non competitive plants Competitive plants Teams located in plants Product industrialization Research 50% 85% 48% 96% Product development 50% 48% Sales 45% 47% Marketing 20% 30% Involvement in innovation Strong 64% 51% Limited 36% 42% None 7% Source: Roland Berger Manufacturing Competitiveness Radar Survey 22

23 Amsterdam Barcelona Beijing Beirut Berlin Boston Brussels Bucharest Budapest Casablanca Chicago Detroit Doha Dubai Düsseldorf Frankfurt Gothenburg Guangzhou Hamburg Hong Kong Istanbul Jakarta Kuala Lumpur Kyiv Lagos Lisbon London Madrid Manama Milan Montreal Moscow Mumbai Munich New York Paris Prague Riga Rome São Paulo Seoul Shanghai Singapore Stockholm Stuttgart Taipei Tokyo Vienna Warsaw Zagreb Zurich PARIS OFFICE 62-64, rue de Lisbonne Paris Phone We thank the following people for collaborating to produce this study: To be part of our 2015 survey, please send your to: [email protected] Michel Jacob, Managing Partner France Max Blanchet, Senior Partner Emmanuel Bonnaud, Senior Partner Georges de Thieulloy, Partner Candice Rodriguez, Marketing & Public Relations 23