In the last few months, I have done an extensive amount of travel to the different industrial regions in North America, including the southeast, the Midwest, the southwest, the "rust belt" and Ontario and Michigan, for the purpose of building up my own company. Through my role in the London Region Manufacturing Council ("LRMC"), I have participated in numerous "round table" discussions and have listened to industry and government leaders speak of their plans, or opinions, on rebuilding or re-igniting industries in their regions. And through it all, I see hope, sense optimism, and hear about "the light at the end of the tunnel".

And, over-all, I think it's true. But, some regions were hit harder than others, and some rebounded earlier than others, and the biggest two, Michigan and Ontario, are finally starting to show some positive signs too.

Ontario and Michigan have long been considered the two most significant manufacturing jurisdictions, and their recovery seems to have been the slowest in happening. Perhaps this is just because of their size - it's harder for a big ship to change direction than a small ship. But in my travels through Michigan, I sense a new attitude at the grass roots level, a re-invention of sorts, and perhaps even a new identity. I don't sense this yet in Ontario.

In Ontario, there is still an attitude that suggests that governments have to step in and do something, that somehow government has to do more to protect our industries. In Michigan, it's the companies and factories themselves that are reinventing themselves. They're not waiting anymore - the cavalry is not coming, no one else is coming to save the day. Those that have survived have survived because they have adapted and adjusted, and after tasting a bit of success, have adopted a whole hearted attitude of constantly adapting and adjusting.

Success comes with its baggage, which is all the things we hold on to and refuse to let go of, even after the usefulness ends and it just gets in the way. Ontario and Michigan both accumulated a lot of baggage during their 70 or 80 years of success, and both clung fiercely to what they perceived as "gains". But Michigan lost far more than Ontario, and as a result, reached the point of shedding some of that baggage far faster than Ontario. Ontario continues to layer on more and more legislation to control the industry or protect the workers not realizing that words like "lean", "flexible" as well as "responsible" and "accountable" are the key words in industry today. Nobody understands the true meaning of these words like a company that has managed to survive, and perhaps even thrive, in the toughest times for manufacturers since the depression. They had to be smart, and determined, and adaptable.

Not every story in Michigan is a turnaround or a success story, but many of the ones left standing certainly are - and that starts right near the top, with Ford. Ford held onto the vision and values it held close to its core, but was then willing to challenge everything else about what it did or how it did it. (For example, in Ontario they chose to close the St. Thomas facility, despite attractive incentives offered by the provincial government and concesssions offered by the workforce to keep it open. They made their decision based on their business plans, not anyone else's.) 

The successful Tier 1's have followed that lead. In Eastern Michigan, I have been in some facilities where workers and management have historically been on opposite sides of the table, but now they are on the same side, day in and day out. No one has to protect these workers from their employers because they know that together they can do a far better looking after their jobs themselves. In Western Michigan, I have been through other factories that were taken over by new companies after the original companies failed or became unsustainable. They were then retooled and reinvigorated, with new equipment and new attitudes, and they are once again profitable and confident of their future.

I'm not saying that companies have to be allowed to fail in order to eventually succeed. Failure is not a necessity; failure is only a necessity if unsustainable companies refuse to consider all the changes that might be necessary, including letting go of accumulated baggage.

Hey Ontario, it's time to stop expecting, or even worse 'asking', government to fix our manufacturing industry. Instead, we should ask that the government steps back and stop trying to "lead" the recovery. Most of the time government gets involved, they get in the way. Remember, the word "govern" doesn't mean to "lead", it means to regulate and control. We don't need more controls and regulations, we need less. We need industries and companies to be able to, and willing to, lead courageously. The tax cuts in recent budgets are a good invitation for companies to look at investing in Ontario again, but that is just the start.

In the 80's, Lee Iacocca said "in the automotive industry, you lead, follow, or get out of the way". In Ontario today, our mantra should be for industries to lead, and government to get out of the way, because few manufacturing companies in this province are going to survive just by "following".