America’s Golden Age is behind us. And, I don’t believe there is any chance of reversing a trend that began thirty plus years ago. The best case scenario for the nation is to arrest the rate of economic decline – never mind social and cultural decline, which are probably lodged in irreversible decay. As Robert Kaplan says in his book, The Revenge of Geography, we might prolong our position of strength by preparing the world for our own obsolesence. But even this outcome will require the strength of will that has yet to be demonstrated by leaders in business, education, and government.
Let’s face it, manufacturing is lost to our shores for all intents and purposes. There are now roughly 12 million workers engaged in manufacturing down from approximately 18 million in the 1980’s. And, despite President Trump’s determined efforts to revitalize manufacturing, coal, and steel, those numbers will continue to slip on a trend line basis.
IF WE’RE NOT MAKING STUFF WHAT ARE WE TO DO?
Services is the new game in town accounting for roughly 80% of GDP. And, as a nation, we better excel in that new cycle reality. But from the way we treat our veterans, clients, patients, students, donors, and citizens – customers, all, to my way of thinking – you would think that we are flush with options on which to fall back. We are not. The United States does run a balance of payments surplus in services of about $250 billion – compared to a goods deficit of approximately $800 billion – but don’t let that fool you. In the all-important Computer and Business Services category, imports are almost on a par with exports. The nation now imports approximately $139 billion of these vital services while exporting about $178 billion. Moreover, unless we accelerate the rate of growth of exports – the rate of growth is about even for both imports and exports – we might soon be facing a deficit in this sector of the economy so crucial for the good health of the nation in the twenty-first century.
In survey after survey consumers judge excellence in their suppliers to be in the 5% range. Perform any human endeavor at that level of proficiency and you are an abject failure. In the services sector, however, that is par for the course. In the Far East, cultural determinants do not confuse service with servitude. As a rule, suppliers will go the extra mile to please a consumer. In the West, and particularly in the United States, the most that a service worker can muster when asked to perform a personalized service is to utter something like,“no problem.” That kind of attitude is ingrained and certain to keep our level of excellence from exceeding the aforementioned 5%. In the meantime, off-shore locations feast on our indifference to service and do whatever it takes to secure, and maintain a customer relationship.
The oft-cited explanation for the comparative advantage of off-shore locations, namely, their low cost, is a facile response to a more complicated dynamic. It is true that off-shore locations enjoy all-in cost advantages vis-a-vis the United States. President Trump, to his credit, is working hard to level the financial playing field by, among other things, proposing to reduce our world-leading corporate tax rates; by proposing a tax holiday for repatriated corporate profits, and by perhaps instituting a VAT on imports as most nations now do. But my experience is that, particularly in technical disciplines, services delivered by off-shore locations are superior to ours. The President’s apprenticeship initiative, if it were aggressively expanded to include STEM occupations, might make us more competitive in this area. But until and unless we grow a much larger crop of more competent technical workers we will continue to be outperformed by nations more determined, more dedicated, hungrier than we are.
THE NATION FACES SOME VERY STIFF HEADWINDS
The United States economy has structural defects which will not go away simply by holding rallies and mouthing rhetorical flourishes. Decline might be inexorable but we should not stand by as mere spectators. The will and purpose to restore our economic vitality must be marshaled by every American. It must begin, first and foremost, by demanding of our leaders, our institutions, and ourselves to be unafraid to serve. It is the remotest possibility that we can salvage the service economy and consequently our nation unless our standard of performance is nothing less than service excellence in everything we do.
We don’t have a lot going for ourselves. Labor productivity is stalled; education is at third world levels; the rate of household savings is paltry; regulation and taxation suffocates businesses and individuals; unemployment – not the nominal rate but the U6 rate which measures functional unemployment – is mired at deep recession levels of 9%; the national debt is in the stratosphere, and fraud and corruption run rampant among other serious afflictions.
Prior to Mr. Trump’s coming to office, the federal government was hell-bent on redistributing wealth rather than getting out of the way so that risk capitalists could create wealth. We’ll just have to see if the President’s reforms bring back a full-throated free market approach to the nation’s issues. Meanwhile, in the corporate world, business leaders are fixated on how quarterly earnings affect their pay packages, and when push comes to shove, cutting corners and worse. It is rare to see business leaders get compensated for delivering excellence in service to those from whom they benefit the most: the customer. But don’t expect any changes in this area until there is an all-out shareholder revolt that devolves power back to the rightful owners of these firms.
IS THE UNITED STATES AT END OF EMPIRE?
The former world economic power, the United Kingdom, lost its supremacy because it failed to adapt. Britain’s decline is explained by a long adherence to a variety of rigid policies and practices that kept it from adapting to new world realities – few of them having to do with the nation’s industrial or manufacturing prowess per se. Yes, Britain’s labor unions had a big hand in the demise of the country’s supremacy by stiff-arming productivity improvements on the factory floor but other factors did as well. In a nutshell, these factors had to do with a stubborn unwillingness, a hubris, on the part of British suppliers to get sufficiently close to the customer on the continent of Europe and elsewhere so as to better understand their requirements. Finally, British industrialists were late to recognize that the discipline of engineering – the social media phenomenon of the day – was anything more than a trade.
Understanding these historical precedents is instructive because I’m afraid that we are witnessing our own rigidities. And, if we fail to respond forcefully, urgently, and with fresh approaches we will be the ones booted off center stage. Unfortunately, China and other emerging economies, especially, are already showing us the door.
Related articles across the web