manuel a. mencia senior vice president...

MANUEL A. MENCIA

SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT

INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT

ENTERPRISE FLORIDA, INC.

Manuel (Manny) A. Mencia is Sr. Vice President of the International Trade and Business

Development unit of Enterprise Florida, Inc. Enterprise Florida, Inc. (EFI) is a not-for-profit

government business partnership established to guide the development of Florida’s economy.

The mission of EFI is to support business growth and assist companies in the creation of jobs by

coordinating the State of Florida's economic development and international trade programs and by

promoting Florida as a competitive global business center.

The International Trade and Business Development unit is headquartered in Miami and maintains

offices in six Florida cities as well as fourteen countries around the world.

In 2000, Export Magazine and the Council for Urban Economic Development (CUED) conferred

their Gold Award to EFI’s Division of International Trade, as the best statewide export development

organization in the country. In 2001, EFI received the prestigious Presidential E-Award for Export

Development in its first year of eligibility. In 2009, EFI’s ITBD unit received the President’s E

Star Award for Export Promotion Excellence, our nation’s highest trade development honor.

Mr. Mencia joined Enterprise Florida in 1996. Prior to that, he served as Vice President of World

Marketing at The Miami Dade Beacon Council, between 1992 and 1996.

He has acquired extensive international trade expertise, having served in various executive positions

at the Florida Department of Commerce between 1977 and 1991.

He is a member of the Board of directors of the State International Development Organizations

(SIDO), the national organization of state trade development agencies ad was it’s president for

2011-2012;.He also co-chairs the Florida International Trade Partnership (FITP) and serves on the

board of the Florida Export Finance Corporation, World Trade Center-Miami, Florida , University

of Miami’s Launch Pad and is a member of the Florida District Export Council.

In 1990, the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce selected Mr. Mencia as Government Hispanic

Business Advocate of the Year. In 2003, the International Business Council of South Florida named

him International Businessman of the Year and in 2010, he was awarded the International

Achievement Award, Florida’s most prestigious award for lifetime achievement in international

business.

Mr. Mencia obtained a Bachelor of Science degree from Florida International University in

Education and a Bachelor of Arts degree from St. Thomas University in Political Science.

MARK SCHMIT NATIONAL ACCOUNTS MANAGER

MANUFACTURING EXTENSION PARTNERSHIP NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY

Mark Schmit has served multiple roles while with the National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST) Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP). Mark is currently MEP’s National Accounts Manager. In this role he is responsible for developing partnerships with both the public and private sector entities. He identifies new business opportunities that leverage state & federal funding with the goal to improve the competitiveness of US- based manufacturers. His major areas of focus supply chain improvement. Previously at MEP, Mark was an Account Manager for the cooperative agreements maintained between NIST MEP and the MEP centers located throughout the United States. Roles in this position included managing performance, developing and maintaining state and local partner relationships and promoting best business practices throughout the MEP system. Before coming to NIST, Mark worked inside the MEP network as Project Manager at the MassMEP and was part of the management team that established MEP’ s presence in the nor theast. Mark has also held positions at the National Coalition for Advanced Manufacturing and the National Assoc iation of Manufacturers. Mark earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in Business Administration from the University of New Hampshire and a Masters degree in Business Administration from Johns Hopkins University.

MICHAEL MASSERMAN

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR EXPORT POLICY,

PROMOTION, AND STRATEGY

INTERNATIONAL TRADE ADMINISTRATION

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

As the Presidentially appointed Executive Director for Export Policy, Promotion, and Strategy at

the U.S. Department of Commerce, Michael Masserman is in charge of operationalizing the

President’s National Export Initiative (NEI). The NEI is an initiative that President Obama laid

out in his 2010 State of the Union to double exports by the end of 2014. In this role, Michael

also oversees the Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee, which is made up of 20 agencies

within the U.S. Government. In addition to helping drive a “whole of government” approach to

the NEI, Michael coordinates closely with private-sector companies, trade associations,

chambers of commerce, and institutions such as Brookings, on global trade/export policies.

Prior to his current role, Michael served as the Director of the Office of Advisory Committees

within the Department of Commerce, where he managed over 20 different committees, including

the President’s Export Council, that advise the President, Secretary of Commerce and the USTR

on the formulation and implementation of trade policies. With more than 500 private sector

advisors, these committees provide a critical link between the economic interests of U.S.

industries and the broader public policy concerns of the U.S. Government.

Michael began his career practicing international corporate law at Simpson Thatcher & Bartlett

in New York, where his focus was primarily on domestic and cross-border capital markets and

securities transactions. After a number of years at Simpson Thatcher, he moved to Sydney,

Australia where he worked at the law firm Mallesons Stephen Jaques and specialized in

international mergers and acquisitions as well as international corporate finance.

Michael has broad experience in cross-border transactions having advised clients and companies

across many industries and regions, including South America, Asia, Europe and Africa. His

experience includes working on international deals where he’s represented investment banks,

hedge funds, private-equity firms, and an array of manufacturing and services companies. He

has worked with pulp manufacturers, wireless telecommunications companies, and major

airlines, as well as companies who produce medical transcription devices, natural gas

transmission systems, and electrical and fiber optic connectors.

Michael took a leave of absence from his law firm in Australia to join the Obama campaign,

where he worked on the political, field and constituency teams in a number of states. After the

campaign, he worked as a business development consultant for a start-up company where,

among other tasks, he worked on enhancing the global supply chain strategy for the company.

Michael received his B.A. with distinction from the University of Michigan and his J.D. cum

laude from University of California, Hastings College of the Law.

1

STATE LEVEL INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

September 27, 2012

2

State Trade Programs

• Complement U.S. government export development programs

• Implement state specific trade strategies• Focus on selected target industries with highest

potential• Market state business advantages through trade

programs• Serve a broader range of companies• Engage on trade advocacy (directly or with SIDO)

3

Enterprise Florida Priorities

• Expand market share in Latin America• Assist small/mid-size producers diversify exports to

emerging markets in Asia, Africa and Middle East• Grow high-tech and knowledge-based services

exports worldwide• Increase exports and FDI market share in Brazil• Capitalize from Panama Canal expansion• Market Florida as an ideal investment destination

worldwide and identify FDI

4

Key Target Markets Worldwide

��

��

��

�� !��

�� "�� "��

North America, Latin America and the Caribbean Basin

Europe

Far East (Asia) and Oceania

Africa and Middle East

5

How we do it…• Trade shows EFI organizes Florida

Pavilions in major trade sector specific trade show overseas, so that Florida companies can showcase and demonstrate their latest products, services, find new clients and opportunities.

• Trade missions are business development delegations that target markets of high opportunity, to help Florida companies to identify new clients and develop strategic relationships through business matchmakers.

Florida company meeting with a Dominican company during EFI’s Export Sales Mission to Santo Domingo, February 2011

6

How we do it…

• Statewide Trade Offices provide an array of programs and services to Florida manufacturers, export intermediaries and professional service providers through our network located in Jacksonville, Orlando, Pensacola, Tallahassee, Tampa, West Palm Beach and Miami.

• Export Counseling include a FREE evaluation of a company’s market readiness, selecting target markets for its products or services, trade statistics , research and problem solving assistance.

• Educational Events are conducted throughout the state on export fundamentals, opportunities, developing export strategy and more.

• Export Finance in collaboration with the Florida Export Finance Corporation can guide small-to-medium sized companies to state and federal sources.

2

7

How we do it…• The Florida Export Directory:

Register your company for free! www.FloridaExportDirectory.com

• International Office Network: Offices in Brazil, Canada, China, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Israel, Japan, Mexico, South Africa, Spain, Taiwan and the U.K.

• Target Sector Trade Grants*: Provides event specific grants on a reimbursable basis to eligible small companies.

• Export Marketing Plan Program: Designed to provide a road map to Florida SME manufacturers to enter the export business.

8

State Trade and Export Promotion (STEP Grant Program)

• Pilot grant initiative for state export assistance• Administered by the SBA• Authorized for 3-years under the Small Business

Jobs Act of 2010• Awards $30 million annually to State agencies• All 50 States, D.C., Puerto Rico and other U.S.

territories • Programs most focus on small exporters

9

State Trade and Export Promotion Grant (STEP Grant Program)

Wrapping up first STEP Grant:GRANT AWARD: $780,000

TRADE MISSIONS• Florida-Brazil Expo (Mission Costs/Gold Keys/Exhibition Booth Grants)• Team Florida Mission to South Africa (Mission Costs/Gold Keys)

CHINA PROGRAMS• China International Boat Show (Mission Costs/Booth Grants)• China IT Show (Mission Costs/Booth Grants)• China Medical Equipment Fair (Mission Costs/Booth Grants)

DIRECT GRANTS/SUBSIDIES• Target Sector Trade Event Grants• Export Marketing Plans w/ Gold Keys

10

State Trade and Export Promotion Grant (STEP Grant Program)

Programs for next STEP Grant:REQUESTED GRANT AMOUNT: $1.1 Million

• Team Florida Mission to Colombia• Team Florida Mission to Asia• Trade Mission to Panama & Costa Rica• Arab Health Trade Show• HOSPITALAR Trade Show• Target Sector Trade Event Grants• Gold Key Service• Export Marketing Plans w/ Gold Keys• Florida Export Directory Memberships• Florida Online Export Expo Memberships

11

Export MarketingPlans

• 16 Export Marketing Plans have been completed

• 12 Plans are in the pipeline

• 2 companies are signed up for Plans to be funded in the next round of STEP grants

• 10 companies have completed their Gold Key Applications

• 2 of the 10 companies participated in EFI’s Trade Mission to Trinidad and Tobago

• The rest are in the process of using their Gold Keys

12

FDI Recruitment in the U.S.

• Historically FDI has been the responsibility of the states

• States have spend billions in FDI marketing and incentives

• FDI recruitment is a highly specialized discipline • Most states have staff dedicated exclusively to FDI• Strategies vary based on comparative advantages

and target industries• Project confidentiality is vital to recruitment

3

13

Enterprise Florida Assistance and Services

• FDI marketing worldwide• Community profiles• Site identification assistance• Business incentives/Sales tax exemptions• Expedited permitting and regulatory assistance• Business introductions• Foreign office support network (15 offices)

14

Florida’s Key State Incentives

• Qualified Target Industry Tax Refund (QTI)• Quick Response Training Incentives (QRT)• Incumbent Worker Training Program (IWT)• Economic Development Transportation Fund• Sales Tax Exemptions• Specialized Incentives (Tax Credits, Brownfields,

Enterprise Zones)• Expedited Permitting Assistance

eflorida.com/bizclimate

15

9/17/2012

1

Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership

VisionMEP is a catalyst for strengthening American manufacturing – accelerating its ongoing transformation into a more efficient and powerful engine of innovation driving economic growth and job creation.

MEP Drives Innovation by serving as a strategic advisor to promote business growth and connect manufacturers to public and private resources essential for increased competitiveness and profitability.

2

The MEP Program in Short . . .Program started in 1988, with at least one center in all 50 states by 199660 centers with 440 field locations- System wide, Non-Federal staff is over 1,300- Contracting with over 2,100 third party service providers

Partnership Model – Federal/State/Industry MEP System budget ~ $300M- 1/3 Federal, 2/3 State and Industry (fees for services)

Program started because of “market failures” in terms of access to information, technical expertise and cost. Subsequent study in 2003 by NAPA reconfirmed the continued existence of these market failures.Emphasis on performance – program and center – measured based upon impact of center services on client firms.

3

Partnering to Drive a National Program

4

• Customers> 306,000 Small& Medium Sized Manufacturers

Over 2,100 Affiliated Services Providers

Over 1,300 Center Staff

440 Service Locations

60 MEP Centers

• Integration, Knowledge Sharing, & EvaluationNIST

MEP Centers Across the U.S.

5

800.MEP.4MFGwww.mep.nist.gov

Client Impacts Resulting from MEP Services – FY2010

6

• New Sales $3.6 Billion• Retained Sales $4.6 Billion• Capital Investment $1.9 Billion• Cost Savings $1.3 Billion• Jobs Created and Retained 60,497

9/17/2012

2

Why is MEP Involved in Exporting?• SMEs responsible for creating nearly 2/3 of employment

over the last 16 years*

• SMEs that export grow faster, add jobs faster, pay higher wages.

• In 2010, 59 percent of all SME exporters, nearly three-fifths-had sales to only one foreign market (typically Canada or Mexico)**

• MEP wants more profitable manufacturers through:– New Sales– New Products– New Markets (domestically / internationally)

• The P in MEP = Partnership*International Trade Commission, Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: Overview of Participation in U.S. Exports, January 2010** International Trade Administration, Small & Medium-Sized Exporting Companies: Statistical Overview, 2010

Program Overview

What is ExporTech?

• An Export Acceleration System for Achieving Profitable Growth- System/Process versus Training

• Helps Companies Enter or Expand in Global Markets- Develop a vetted international growth plan- Obtain and apply expert knowledge specific to their needs- Reduce risk and increase chance of success

9

Program Timeline

10

ImplementExportGrowth

Plan

4-5 wks

Market Research

Target Market Selection

ConductResearch & Initiate Plan

4-6 wks

Plan Development

Concrete Strategies for

Going to Market

DevelopExport

Plan

Session 1:Export Strategy &

Best Practices

Successful Export Strategies

Best PracticesPlan Template

Individual Coaching on

Market Research, Target Markets, Manufacturing Capacity and

Export Assistance

UnderstandExport Success

Models

Session 2:Mechanics of

Exporting

Custom Agenda Based on

Company Needs:e.g. Distributor &

Rep Partners, Logistics, Payment Legal , IP, Culture,

etc.

Fill Information Gaps & Remove

Obstacles

Session 3:Export Growth Plan

Presentations

Panel Review ofEach CompanyPlan with Expert

Feedback &Coaching

Action Plan for Going to Market

ObtainPlan

Feedback

ExporTech Program Features and BenefitsAccelerated Speed-To-Market• Jump starts international sales growth• Results in actionable Strategic Export Growth Plan• Plans vetted by panel of international business experts• Coaching support for accountabilityEfficient Connection / Time Savings• Efficiently connects companies with experts and qualified vendors• Customized topics and speakers• Applied knowledge through small group and one-on-one interactionReduced Risk and Increased Success• Engages top leadership• Starts with the big picture in mind (strategic focus)• Research on strategies/practices that distinguish successful exporters

11

Target Companies

• New-To-Export, Limited OR Moderate Exporter - Moderate: <10% of sales, reactive approach- Ideal candidate: Moderate exporter that wants to become more

proactive and aggressive about international• Executive Level

- CEO or Owner- VP/Director of International Sales- VP/Director of Sales and Marketing

12

9/17/2012

3

ExporTech Program Summary

13

Program Summary# Programs Completed: 63# States: 23# Companies that Participated: 415# Additional Programs in Progress or Scheduled 18

ExporTech Client Results

• Average sales increase of $170K• Often, sales generated within 3-6 months• Average cost savings/avoidance $34K

- 120 hours of labor time savings• Estimated operating margin gain of 10x investment (in labor

and fees)

14

Benefits for Partners

15

MEP Center

• Impact• Leads • New clients

Partners (e.g. USEAC/DOC/ State Trade Office)

• Export successes• More efficient

work with companies (versus one-on-one)

• New clients• Trade mission and

Gold Key participation

ExporTech

Roles of Key Partners• Session Facilitator (MEP, USEAC, State or 3rd Party)

- Session preparation- Present and facilitate for three full-day sessions- Follow-up with partners, coaches, and companies

• Company Coach (USEAC, MEP, State, or DEC)- Work with companies during, between and after sessions- Introduce companies to pertinent resources- Assist with Export Plan development- Obtain market information

• Project Management (MEP and USEAC)- Market program/recruit companies- Partner coordination- Qualify leads- Arrange logistics and obtain speakers

16

Economics

17

Where We Have Been• Programs funded by fees, government

investment, sponsors• Centers often set “list” price, and offer

state training funds, grants as offsets• Net fees per company after offsets

have ranged from $500 - $3,000- “Typical” net fee is $1000-$1,250

• For most regions, not enough to cover labor costs. Centers/organizers have been willing to charge below costs:

- New service offering- Lead generator, educational program

Where we are Going• Increasing fees per company /

Developing sustainable model- NIST and USCS have formulated

policies for ExporTech to encourage full cost recovery

- National pricing model $5,000/co. (beginning 10/1/13)

- Bundling with other services also being considered to increase price point

Future Opportunities

• Many are beginning to include Gold Key Service in ExporTech registration

• Link ExporTech to specific trade mission (industry or country focused)

• Additional partner involvement

18

9/17/2012

4

For More Information

Kari ReidyNIST/[email protected]

19

The Future of the Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership A Program of the National Institute of Standards and Technology,

U.S. Department of Commerce

Executive Summary This document describes the future strategic direction for the Manufacturing Extension Partnership – MEP. Given the critical nature of manufacturing to the United States, the rapid changes to the economic, business and technology environment that is occurring both domestically and globally, and the necessity for manufacturers to keep pace with these changes, the role of MEP as a catalyst for maintaining and increasing the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturers is more important now than anytime in history. Over its 20-year existence, MEP has proven its value to manufacturers as demonstrated by the resulting impact on jobs and the economies of all 50 States and the U.S. as a whole. Now is the time to build on these experiences to expand the capacity and capabilities of the MEP nationwide network to address the challenges facing manufacturers. With this goal in mind, this document describes the vision, mission and approaches MEP will take to support manufacturers to improve their competitive position, to grow their business, and to maintain a strong manufacturing base in the U.S.

Vision MEP is a catalyst for strengthening American manufacturing –

accelerating its ongoing transformation into a more efficient and powerful engine of innovation driving economic growth and job creation.

Mission

To act as a strategic advisor to promote business growth and connect manufacturers to public and private resources essential for increased

competitiveness and profitability.

Importance of Manufacturing in the United States A strong manufacturing base is critical to the financial and national security of the United States. U.S. manufacturing firms employ over 13 million people in high-paying jobs with benefits; represent roughly two-thirds of total U.S. research and development expenditures; and account for more than 80 percent of all U.S. exports. If the U.S. manufacturing sector were a country, it would be the 8th largest country in terms of gross domestic product (GDP) in the world. Manufacturing creates millions of jobs, directly and indirectly, in a wide range of related industries. These include business services such as accounting, marketing, legal support, shipping, and warehousing as well as millions more indirect jobs in other local industries. Beyond these services supporting the extended manufacturing enterprise, the broader U.S. service economy also depends increasingly on the adoption of technologies from the manufacturing sector to keep pace with global competition.

December 2008 1

Current Manufacturing Landscape – The Challenges Manufacturers, particularly small and mid-sized manufacturing firms, are facing new and significant challenges. While efficient shop floor operations of a firm represent a large part of manufacturing, efficiency alone is not sufficient in the new global marketplace. Technology and globalization have fundamentally changed many manufacturing companies and products. This has led in turn to a new era of cost pressures, shortened product life cycles, technology that is diffusing rapidly on a global scale, and production that now involves orchestrating networks of suppliers. Manufacturing increasingly depends on access to customers and the infrastructure needed to support the constant reinvention of their products and processes. The challenge is clear: Increasing global competition coupled with the changing nature of innovation demands the U.S. not rest on a strategy of simple productivity improvements.

Manufacturers must master innovative product design, understand the benefits of adopting environmentally sustainable processes, invest in human and physical capital, leverage a range of financing options, realize international trade opportunities, and forecast future customer demands -- even before the customer knows their needs.

Modern day manufacturing requires not only an efficient production system but also developing business strategies that highlight the unique capabilities of a firm and demonstrate their advantages over competitors. This means manufacturers must master innovative product design, understand the benefits of adopting environmentally sustainable processes, invest in human and physical capital, leverage a range of financing options, realize international trade

opportunities, and forecast future customer demands – even before the customer knows their needs. The manufacturers of the future will need to understand their brand and take advantage of all their assets – tangible and intangible – to distinguish themselves in the market. Just to survive, manufacturing firms need to more quickly adopt new technologies, develop more innovative products, and constantly implement process innovations to improve their efficiency, productivity, and cost competitiveness. While each of these improvements independently is foundational and necessary, when managed individually they do not provide long-term competitive advantage. To be positioned not just for survival but for growth, manufacturers need to address five key critical areas in concert:

Manufacturers must position themselves strategically to manage: continuous improvement, technology acceleration, supplier development, sustainability and workforce challenges and opportunities in concert to compete long term.

• Continuous Improvement, • Technology Acceleration, • Supplier Development, • Sustainability and • Workforce.

Both a framework and resources are needed to provide manufacturers the ability to address these critical areas and establish a defendable competitive advantage. Manufacturers’ management and integration of each of these interrelated, interdependent areas will determine their ability to protect and grow profits and compete in the long term.

December 2008 2

MEP as a Catalyst for Change Over its 20-year history, MEP has helped thousands of companies reinvest in themselves through process improvement and business growth initiatives leading to more sales, new markets, and the adoption of technology to deliver new products and services.

MEP Services Generate Significant Impacts For FY2007 clients reported:

• New and retained sales of over $10 billion • More than $1.4 billion in cost savings from

improved processes and waste reduction • Investments in new equipment and business

operations totaling almost $2.2 billion • The creation and retention of 57,079 jobs

Data from an independent follow-up survey of clients completing projects with MEP Centers in FY2007.

While headlines and news stories focus on the current impact of the difficult times faced by particular firms or industries, missed are the significant transformations achieved by others, and the potential opportunities and rewards that accompany these changes. Knowledge application is occurring faster and more efficiently as companies and other organizations (universities, laboratories, suppliers, and customers) become more interconnected. To be successful manufacturers must have access to a wide range of resources that will enable them to sell to new customers, compete in new markets, and develop new products, thus creating new, more profitable revenue streams. MEP will continue to serve as a resource for manufacturing and innovation by expanding and leveraging resources to couple cost reduction strategies with profitable growth through new product development and market expansion. MEP has established itself as the connecting point for manufacturers, state and local governments, private sector resources, research organizations, and the federal government. To respond to this expanded need, MEP will develop new networks and partnerships that companies must have in order to realize an enduring competitive position in the global market. MEP will promote the transition from reactive strategies to the proactive pursuit of increased profits and overall growth by helping manufacturers understand the value of their marketable assets in light of these drivers.

MEP will facilitate the transformation of manufacturing into a more powerful engine oinnovation providing manufacturers with a framework that addresses the drivers of business growth and competitiveness. Figure 1 depicts the five key areas in which MEP will strategically work with companies –focusing on the coordination across these areas to maximize success.

f

Sust

ainab

ility

Technology Acceleration

Continuous Improvement Workforce

Supplier Development

Figure 1. Framework for Business Growth

December 2008 3

The Future of MEP As the MEP program embarks on its next 20 years, the over-arching goal of the Next Generation MEP is to increase manufacturers’ business growth and profitability. This will require additional resources and the development of the networks and partnerships necessary to support a framework that integrates continuous improvement with strategies focused on new product development, market expansion, and workforce needs. Continuous performance improvement strategies enhance productivity and free up capacity for growth. Technology acceleration, supplier development and sustainability strategies represent the next logical steps toward generating profit, creating jobs, and bolstering a long-term competitive position. Success requires that manufacturers develop proactive growth strategies and foster an entrepreneurial workforce. By encouraging firms to invest in themselves across all elements of their organization, MEP will work to create an environment that puts firms in position to innovate in order to create new sales, enter into new markets and adopt new technologies that build competitive advantage. Specifically, the MEP 20/20+ Vision for manufacturers’ aims to reduce bottom-line expenses by 20 percent and grow top-line sales by 20 percent. MEP will work with partners throughout the network to provide the tools, services and connections focused on the five key areas of the framework: continuous improvement, technology acceleration, supplier development, sustainability, and workforce.

Continuous Improvement – Performance Improvement as a Foundation

A culture of continuous improvement is necessary to enhance productivity and free up the capacity that will provide manufacturers a stable foundation to pursue innovation and growth. MEP centers around the country have a strong record and solid reputation for providing superior lean and quality services as well as other programs that target plant efficiencies. MEP will continue to provide a unique approach to implementing the concepts of lean manufacturing across all aspects of the enterprise, scaled for smaller companies to readily adopt, and serving as a starting point to leverage the operational improvements into company-transforming strategies.

Technology Acceleration – Leveraging Technology to Stimulate Business Growth Accelerating opportunities to leverage and adopt technology is the key to long-term business growth and productivity. MEP will serve as the connection between manufacturers and the technology opportunities and solutions they require to grow and compete in the global marketplace. MEP, in partnership with other organizations, will develop the tools and services to bring innovative and affordable new product and process improvement opportunities adapted to the needs of manufacturers. Additionally, MEP will make available a range of product

December 2008 4

development and commercialization assistance services to help manufacturers rapidly move new product opportunities into production and out into the market.

Supplier Development – Responding to Evolving Supply Chains In the expanding global marketplace, the interdependence of Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) and their supply chains will continue to evolve. As the OEMs focus on improving their competitive position through the development of an efficient supply base and the identification of innovative processes and products, it is increasingly important for the suppliers to understand industry needs, market drivers, as well as focus on adopting productivity improvements to remain competitive.

Through work with both OEMs and suppliers, MEP understands industry needs across all levels of the supply chain in terms of market space, integration requirements and best practices. MEP, with expanded resources and partnerships, will systematically develop and deliver the national capacity, tools, and services needed to put suppliers in the best position to thrive in existing and future global supply chains.

Sustainability – Embracing the Green Economy Sustainability has become a key driver of economic growth as global demands for diminishing resources increase, renewable and alternative energy technology needs expand, and environmental concerns heighten. Whether it is simply a response to rising energy and resource costs or as a corporate growth strategy, sustainability seeks to balance economic, environmental, and societal challenges and opportunities. MEP will help companies gain a competitive edge by reducing environmental costs and impact by developing new environmentally-focused materials, products and processes to gain entry into new markets. Sustainable practices also increase manufacturing’s contribution to the economy by helping companies embrace environmental goals profitably. MEP will develop and expand strong and effective partnerships with government and industry to ensure sustainability is embraced at all levels of the economy – from the largest employers to the smallest suppliers to the workforce itself.

Workforce – Establishing and Enabling a Strong Workforce A strong, engaged, and skilled workforce spanning all levels of the organization is a key element necessary for manufacturer’s growth. Together, with partners at the federal, state, and local levels, MEP has developed and delivered training and workforce assistance tailored to the unique needs of the smaller manufacturer. Recognizing that an efficient and effective manufacturing workforce of the future begins with a shift in corporate culture, MEP will expand partnerships and collaborations to develop and deliver the tools and services needed to foster the development of progressive managers and entrepreneurial CEOs, and continue to provide training and educational opportunities for the entire manufacturing operation.

December 2008 5

December 2008 6

Next Generation MEP: Approach and Tactics Next Generation MEP represents a vision for expanding the capacity and capabilities of MEP and its nationwide network of centers and field offices to address the evolving needs of U.S.-based manufacturers. The framework outlined includes strategies that are interrelated, interdependent, and ambitious. No single strategy or tactic alone will provide all the solutions needed by today’s manufacturers. The diverse, interrelated elements necessary for business growth will require MEP to depend on its proven ability to expand and foster partnerships at the National, regional, State and local levels to meet these needs. Success will require that NIST MEP, the MEP system of Centers and all partner organizations work together to leverage knowledge and resources in developing and delivering the solutions, skills and tools to build manufacturers’ competitive advantage. Unique opportunities exist at all levels of government to provide the support and resources manufacturers need to innovate and grow. Changing national priorities and economic uncertainties provide both challenges and opportunities and further emphasize the need to leverage resources and strengthen partnerships. MEP is moving forward with implementing the Next Generation MEP and the development of specific tactics and goals while recognizing the need to remain agile and flexible, respond to continuing change, and adapt to national, state, and local needs and opportunities. MEP will work with policymakers at the Federal, State and City level to put in place the infrastructure and allocate resources that encourage manufacturers to take the bold steps required to face these challenges and accelerate the transformation of U.S. manufacturing.

MAKING A DIFFERENCE FOR AMERICA’S MANUFACTURERS

The NIST Manufacturing

Extension Partnership

is a nationwide system

of resources, transforming

manufacturers to compete

globally, supporting

greater supply chain

integration, and providing

access to technology for

improved productivity.

At the heart of MEP are

manufacturing extension

centers locally positioned

throughout the U.S. and

Puerto Rico to

address the critical and

often unique needs of

America’s manufacturers.

Manufacturing: Vital to the U.S. Economy

• Manufacturing accounts for 12% of the nation’s gross domestic product (GDP) • Factory jobs account for 10% of the total U.S. nonfarm employment • Manufacturing jobs pay more on average, and provide better benefits • Small manufacturers represent 99% of all manufacturing establishments • Between 2001 and 2007, manufacturing productivity grew at a much faster pace than total nonfarm business

The U.S. Manufacturing Sector is Facing Challenges

• The decline in manufacturing employment has been accelerating in recent years • Manufacturing’s share of GDP has dropped • Productivity gains have decelerated • The U.S. is increasingly importing manufactured goods

The Challenge for Small Manufacturers: Bridging the Productivity Gap As critical as small manufacturers are to the economy, the productivity gap between large and small firms has widened. Between 1992 and 2002, value-added per employee for large manufacturers grew by 41.6 percent versus 35.3 percent for small manufacturers.** And, as large manufacturers increase their dependence on suppliers for parts and services, the performance and capabilities of small manufacturers become even more critical to the competitiveness of all manufacturers and to the health of the U.S. economy. Yet, according to a National Research Council report, “Many of these small firms, however, are operating far below their potential. Their use of modern manufacturing equipment, methodologies and management practices is inadequate to ensure that American manufacturing will be globally competitive.”*** Limited budgets, lack of in-house expertise, and lack of access to the newest technologies are but a few of the significant barriers faced by small manufacturers – barriers that they can overcome by working with MEP.

(* Bureau of Labor Statistics, ** US Census Bureau, *** National Academy of Sciences) How MEP is Making a Difference 31,961 Manufacturers served in FY2008 MEP has completed nearly 392,000 customer engagements since the program’s inception including technical assistance projects, training programs, networking events and long-term strategic support. MANUFACTURING EXTENSION CENTERS MEP is a national system of affiliated manufacturing extension centers and field offices located throughout all 50 states and Puerto Rico. Created in 1988, today’s system delivers services to firms across the country and in Puerto Rico. Centers are funded by federal, state, local and private resources to serve small manufacturers. Each center works directly with area manufacturers to provide expertise and services tailored to their most critical needs, which range from lean manufacturing and worker training to business practices and implementation of technology innovations. MEP provides the solutions manufacturers need utilizing the expertise of both center staff and outside consultants. Centers often work with small firms to overcome barriers in locating and obtaining private-sector resources. As the needs of manufacturers change, MEP tailors the services it offers to reflect these changes. The recent introduction of growth services products is an example of this type of new service. PARTNERSHIPS MEP provides manufacturers with access to a wealth of tools, techniques and other resources through thousands of public and private affiliations. Initiatives with the U.S. Departments of Labor, Defense, and Energy; EPA; SBA; the State Science and Technology Institute; the National Association of Manufacturers; state and local employment training organizations; and hundreds of universities and community colleges are a few examples of how MEP leverages public and private resources to make a comprehensive range of technical services available to small manufacturers. Each year, MEP collaborates with thousands of manufacturers to solve problems, to increase productivity and to achieve higher profits. Through continuous assessment and improvement of our products, services and service-delivery approaches, MEP is committed to meeting the strategic needs of manufacturers in today’s globally competitive market.

RESULTS: WHAT THE DATA SHOW

31,961 Manufacturers served in FY2008 MEP has completed nearly 400,000 customer engagements since the program’s inception including technical assistance projects, training programs, networking events and long-term strategic support.

FY 2007* MEP CLIENT IMPACTS AS A DIRECT RESULT OF MEP ACTIVITIES

Increased/Retained Sales $10.5 billion New Sales $5.60 billion Retained Sales $ 4.88 billion Cost Savings $1.44 billion New Client Investment in Modernization $ 2.19 billion Jobs Created 17,316 Jobs Retained 39,763 * Independent follow-up of clients with projects completed in FY2007. Of the 6,679 clients selected to be surveyed, 5,981 completed the survey in FY2008. Measures are a conservative snapshot of benefits. Recurring or cumulative benefits may be larger.

FY2007 Activity Data

For other information about MEP, contact:

Manufacturing Extension Partnership 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 4800

Building 301, Suite C100 Gaithersburg, MD 20899-4800

(301) 975-5020 or [email protected] Or visit our website at www.mep.nist.gov

Phone 800-MEP-4MFG for the center serving your area

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.mep.nist.gov/

CRS Report for CongressPrepared for Members and Committees of Congress

Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program: An Overview

Wendy H. Schacht Specialist in Science and Technology Policy

March 24, 2009

Congressional Research Service

7-5700 www.crs.gov

97-104



Summary The Hollings Manufacturing Partnership (MEP) is a program of regional centers to assist small and medium-sized manufacturing companies use knowledge and technologies developed under the auspices of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Centers in all 50 states and Puerto Rico provide technical and managerial assistance to firms. Federal funding is matched by non-federal sources. Existing resources in government, business, and academia are leveraged while the program endeavors to build on current state and local activities and industrial extension efforts.

The MEP program has, at times, been included in the discussion surrounding termination of government programs that provide direct federal support for industry. Questions have been raised in congressional debate as to the appropriateness of government funding for this program when the technologies are available in the marketplace. Instead of the government picking “winners and losers,” opponents argue, the marketplace should make decisions regarding firms worthy of investment. However, proponents of the program stress that no direct funding is available to companies through MEP and that assistance is technical, scientific, and/or managerial. The Centers facilitate the adoption of new technologies that foster competition and promote innovation. As the 111th Congress makes budget decisions, support for manufacturing extension may be discussed in the context of the role of the federal government in facilitating research and technological advancement.



Contents Background ................................................................................................................................1

The Program...............................................................................................................................1

Funding ......................................................................................................................................2

Evaluations of the Manufacturing Extension Partnership .............................................................3

Issues and Concerns ....................................................................................................................4

Contacts Author Contact Information ........................................................................................................5


Congressional Research Service 1

Background The trade debate in the mid-1980s, which ultimately resulted in passage of the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act (P.L. 100-418), underscored the critical role of technological advance in the competitiveness of individual firms and in long-term national economic growth and productivity. Reflecting these and other ideas, legislation established a public-private program, now known as the Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP), to assist smaller, U.S.-based manufacturing firms in identifying and adopting new technologies. The focus on small and medium-sized companies derived from their perceived contribution to job creation, innovation, and manufacturing. Research at that time indicated that businesses of fewer than 500 employees were about 2.5 times as innovative per employee as large firms. The 341,000 firms that fit this category represent over 99% of the nation’s manufacturing enterprises, employ over 10 million people, and account for 70% of total U.S. manufacturing employment.1

The improved use of technology by small and medium-sized businesses is seen as important to the competitiveness of American manufacturing firms. How a product is designed and produced often determines costs, quality, and reliability. Lack of attention to process technologies and techniques may be the result of various factors, including finances, absence of information, equipment shortages, and/or undervaluation of the benefits of technology. The purpose of the centers program is to address these issues through outreach and the application of expertise, technologies, and knowledge developed within the manufacturing research activities of the federal government.

The Program Located at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), a laboratory of the Department of Commerce, the Manufacturing Extension Partnership program is built on regional centers to assist companies in adopting and adapting new technologies and manufacturing techniques generated by the federal agencies in pursuit of their various missions. The transfer of public sector expertise, particularly that found in NIST, as well as technology suited to the individual requirements of a firm, is to be accomplished through a “manufacturing extension” system. Federal funding is offered on a competitive basis to nonprofit, state, or local organizations for development and management of the centers. Government financing was initially limited to six years, a provision temporarily suspended by the FY1997 and FY1998 appropriations acts, and eliminated by P.L. 105-309. Non-federal sources are required to provide 50% or more of each center’s capital and costs through matched dollars, fees for service collected, and/or industry contributions. After six years, federal funding may be provided at no more than one-third of these costs if the center has received a positive, independent evaluation.

Centers are selected in response to open and competitive solicitations and are merit based. According to NIST, the selection criteria include “knowledge of target firms in the proposed region; linkages to sources of technology; technology delivery mechanisms; and management and financial plans.” The sponsor, locally based, is expected to provide expertise reflecting the needs

1 Manufacturing Extension Partnership, Making A Difference For America’s Manufacturers, available online at http://www.mep.nist.gov/documents/pdf/about-mep/impacts/2007-MEP_MakingDifference21207.pdf.



of the business community and the type of industries in that region. No direct financial support is available for companies; the program offers only technical and managerial assistance that is generally reimbursable on a sliding scale.

The original regional centers program expanded in 1994, creating the Manufacturing Extension Partnership. There are now centers in all 50 states and Puerto Rico. Since the program was established 1989, awards have resulted in the creation of approximately 350 offices. NIST also took over support of 36 extension centers originally funded by the Department of Defense through the Technology Reinvestment Project which was terminated in FY1994.

Centers offer expertise, needs evaluation, application demonstrations for new production technologies, training, and information dissemination. Larger, regional organizations use federal, university, and private sector technologies, knowledge, and skills in providing improved manufacturing techniques designed to increase efficiency and quality and to decrease costs. They also can furnish individual project engineering, help in selecting and employing software and equipment, factory assessments, and provide on-site assistance with new technologies. Managerial, financial, and marketing services are accessible. No new R&D is conducted by the centers which only use technologies available elsewhere in the network. One center may have several field offices to provide support to a broader population. Generally these programs are associated with operating technical or training institutions such as community or technical colleges, vocational institutions, university manufacturing programs, or state technical assistance efforts. They are located in areas of the country where there is less industrial concentration and serve companies out of range of the larger programs.

The Partnership leverages existing resources—whether from government, business, or academia. It does not attempt to supplant the private sector. The program endeavors to build on existing state and local activities and industrial extension efforts. According to NIST, cooperative efforts involve other federal agencies, the National Association of State Development Agencies, the State Science and Technology Institute, the National Association of Manufacturers, and various universities and community colleges.

Funding Initial appropriations for NIST manufacturing extension programs totaled $12.5 million for FY1989 and FY1990. Further funding included $11.9 million in FY1991, $15.1 million in FY1992, and $16.9 million in FY1993. In FY1994, the State Technology Extension Program was combined with the centers’ activity to create the Manufacturing Extension Partnership. Appropriations for the larger effort totaled $30.3 million. Funding for FY1995 was $90.6 million and included a new program, LINKS, to network federal, state, and local agencies, the private sector, and the manufacturing outreach institutions through communications and data systems. However, $16.3 million of this amount was rescinded. MEP was provided with $80 million for FY1996 and P.L. 104-208 provided $95 million for FY1997 while temporarily removing the six-year time limit for federal support of the individual centers. For FY1998, $113.5 million was appropriated while the following year MEP was funded at $106.8 million, which reflected a decrease in the federal share of support as the centers matured. P.L. 105-309 ended the six-year restriction on federal funding if a positive evaluation through an independent review is received at least every two years. Federal financing is limited to no more than one-third of the annual operating and maintenance costs of the center. For FY2000, the Partnership was financed at



$104.2 million (after a mandated rescission) and $105.1 million was appropriated for FY2001. In FY2002, MEP received $106.5 million in funding.

The Bush Administration’s FY2003 request of $12.9 million for the Partnership reflected the recommendation that centers in operation for more than six years no longer receive federal support; however, funding totaled $105.9 million. The following year, the President’s FY2004 budget again included a significant reduction in support for the extension program and only $38.7 million was appropriated. Funding increased to $107.5 million in FY2005. While the Administration’s FY2006 and FY2007 budgets included substantial decreases in financing for MEP, Congress appropriated $104.6 million in FY2006 and $104.6 million in FY2007.

In FY2008, the President’s budget proposal included $46.3 million for MEP, 56% below the FY2007 figure; however the program was funded at $89.6 million which was 14.4% below the previous fiscal year. For FY2009, the Bush Administration’s amended budget request provided $2 million to close out the federally funded portion of MEP. No final FY2009 appropriations legislation for the program was enacted by the close of the 110th Congress. P.L. 110-329, the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009, provided, in part, funding for MEP at FY2008 levels through March 6, 2009.

In the 111th Congress, P.L. 111-8, the FY2009 Omnibus Appropriations Act, includes $110.0 million for manufacturing extension, a 22.8% increase over FY2008.

Evaluations of the Manufacturing Extension Partnership In an August 1995 briefing paper, the General Accounting Office (GAO)explored how small and medium-sized firms were served by various manufacturing extension efforts, including the MEP program (Manufacturing Extension Programs, Manufacturers’ Views of Services). Of the 551 responses (to 766 questionnaires distributed), approximately 73% found that their relationships with an extension activity had a positive effect on the company’s business performance. Fifteen percent indicated that there was no effect at all. Among the impacts identified were improved use of technology (63%), better product quality (61%), and expanded productivity (56%). According to GAO, this suggested that manufacturing extension activities “had some success in achieving their primary goal of helping manufacturers improve their operations through the use of appropriate technologies and through increases in product quality and worker productivity.” The study also found that companies which used internal funding to implement recommendations offered by extension programs were the most likely to find an overall positive impact. “Significantly, approximately 97 percent of [these respondents] ... said that they believed that this investment had been worthwhile.” Those who utilized these organizations noted that practical experience in the field contributed to the success of staff activities, as did the affordability of the assistance. Companies that did not utilize the resources provided by the MEP tended to be those that were unaware of the program and the opportunities associated with it.

Further refining this information in a March 1996 report, Manufacturing Extension Programs, Manufacturers’ Views about Delivery and Impact of Services, GAO also noted that company size and age were significant factors in business perceptions the extension program. Smaller (under $1 million gross sales) and newer (established after 1985) firms “were most likely to report that their overall business performance was boosted by MEP assistance.” While there were no real



differences in perception between extension services offered by NIST and those funded by other institutions, there was a difference in assessments of effectiveness based on whether or not payment was required. According to GAO, those firms that paid fees “were half as likely as those that paid no fees to credit the assistance for having an extremely positive impact, as opposed to a generally positive impact, on their business performance.”

According to NIST, MEP centers have responded to more than 310,000 requests for assistance since the program’s inception.2 Regular reporting is required of the centers, covering the number and type of projects undertaken. Centers also are mandated to collect information that may provide indicators of longer-term results, including changes in sales, financial investments, inventory reduction, savings in labor and materials, and jobs created or saved. The latest survey of clients using the centers during FY2005 found that the 4,726 companies responding indicated that 53,000 jobs were retained or created, $6.3 billion in sales were increased or retained, and $2.2 billion in new private sector investment was placed in plant modernization and training.3

The National Academy of Public Administration also studied the MEP program and found that while “on balance ... the MEP Program performs capably and effectively and that the core premise ... remains viable as it is fulfilling its mission by leveraging both public and private resources to assist the nation’s small manufacturers,” there should be consideration of a “fundamental change in the mix of the types of services it provides as well as the structures for delivering them.... ”4 As such, a Next Generation Strategic Plan has been developed by the Partnership to concentrate on not just the shop floor but on “the entire enterprise and its position in the marketplace.” In addition to individual manufacturing firms, MEP “must focus on industry/supply chain requirements as well as overall economic development trends.”5

Issues and Concerns The Manufacturing Extension Partnership has, at times, been included in the discussion surrounding termination of government programs that provide direct federal support for industry. Questions have been raised as to the appropriateness of government funding for this program when the technologies are available in the marketplace. Instead of the government picking “winners and losers,” opponents argue, the marketplace should make decisions regarding firms worthy of investment. However, proponents of the program stress that no direct funding is available to companies through MEP and that assistance is technical, scientific, and/or managerial. The Centers facilitate the adoption of new technologies that foster competition and promote innovation.

Congress continues to explore the issue of manufacturing extension within the context of federal support for research and development. Until FY2004, despite some opposition to the Manufacturing Extension Partnership, there had been continued and generally increased funding

2 Making a Difference for America’s Manufacturers. 3 Manufacturing Extension Partnership, Delivering Measurable Returns to Its Clients, Fiscal Year 2005 Results, available at http://www.mep.nist.gov/documents/pdf/results/FY2005_MEP_DMR_final_3107.pdf. 4 National Academy of Public Administration, The Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program, Report 2, Alternative Business Models, May 2004, available at http://www.napawash.org/Pubs/NIST6-2-04.pdf. 5 Manufacturing Extension Partnership, Next Generation Strategic Plan, available at http://www.mep.nist.gov/documents/pdf/about-mep/Next_Gen_MEP_Strategy.pdf.



for the program. The lower level of appropriations for FY1999 and FY2000 reflected a decrease in the federal portion of center financing as the programs surpass the original six-year funding limit, not declining congressional support for the activity. The ongoing involvement and financial backing of state and local organizations may indicate additional, widespread commitment to a program designed to expand private sector use of manufacturing technologies already funded by the government and developed by the agencies in response to their mission requirements. While the Administration’s budget proposals continued to call for substantial reductions in support for MEP, with the exception of FY2004, the Congress had appropriated full funding for the centers program although in FY2008 support fell 14.4% from the previous fiscal year. In the current Congress, the final FY2009 appropriations legislation provides $110.0 million in FY2009 financing for manufacturing extension initiatives.

In a related development, the America COMPETES Act (P.L. 110-69) authorized the creation, but did not fund, several new manufacturing programs to be administered by NIST including collaborative manufacturing research pilot grants for partnerships between industry and other educational or research institutions to develop new manufacturing processes, techniques, or materials; a manufacturing fellowship program with stipends available for post-doctoral work at NIST; and a manufacturing research database. These activities differ from the established MEP effort in which no new manufacturing research is conducted as existing manufacturing technology is applied to the needs of small and medium-sized firms.

The issue of the statutory six-year limitation on government financing of individual centers was addressed by the Technology Administration Act of 1998 (P.L. 105-309). Yet, questions still remain, particularly in light of efforts by the Bush Administration and past efforts by the House to reduce federal support for the centers. The original intent of the funding restriction was to encourage the centers to be self-supporting. That does not appear to be feasible at the present time. Questions remain as to whether or not the centers are providing the help that companies are willing to pay for or are reimbursements too costly for the small firms the program is intended to assist. Some commentators are exploring what additional roles might state and local government play in supporting centers and if it is possible to attract more resources from industrial providers of new manufacturing technologies and techniques. These and other issues may be considered within the context of future government funding for the Manufacturing Extension Partnership and overall federal support for research and technological advancement.

Author Contact Information Wendy H. Schacht Specialist in Science and Technology Policy [email protected], 7-7066

MANUEL A. MENCIA

SR. VICE PRESIDENT

INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT

ENTERPRISE FLORIDA, INC.

Manuel (Manny) A. Mencia is Sr. Vice President of the International Trade and Business

Development unit of Enterprise Florida, Inc. Enterprise Florida, Inc. (EFI) is a not-for-profit

government business partnership established to guide the development of Florida’s economy.

The mission of EFI is to support business growth and assist companies in the creation of jobs by

coordinating the State of Florida's economic development and international trade programs and by

promoting Florida as a competitive global business center.

The International Trade and Business Development unit is headquartered in Miami and maintains

offices in six Florida cities as well as fourteen countries around the world.

In 2000, Export Magazine and the Council for Urban Economic Development (CUED) conferred

their Gold Award to EFI’s Division of International Trade, as the best statewide export development

organization in the country. In 2001, EFI received the prestigious Presidential E-Award for Export

Development in its first year of eligibility. In 2009, EFI’s ITBD unit received the President’s E

Star Award for Export Promotion Excellence, our nation’s highest trade development honor.

Mr. Mencia joined Enterprise Florida in 1996. Prior to that, he served as Vice President of World

Marketing at The Miami Dade Beacon Council, between 1992 and 1996.

He has acquired extensive international trade expertise, having served in various executive positions

at the Florida Department of Commerce between 1977 and 1991.

He is a member of the Board of directors of the State International Development Organizations

(SIDO), the national organization of state trade development agencies ad was it’s president for

2011-2012;.He also co-chairs the Florida International Trade Partnership (FITP) and serves on the

board of the Florida Export Finance Corporation, World Trade Center-Miami, Florida , University

of Miami’s Launch Pad and is a member of the Florida District Export Council.

In 1990, the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce selected Mr. Mencia as Government Hispanic

Business Advocate of the Year. In 2003, the International Business Council of South Florida named

him International Businessman of the Year and in 2010, he was awarded the International

Achievement Award, Florida’s most prestigious award for lifetime achievement in international

business.

Mr. Mencia obtained a Bachelor of Science degree from Florida International University in

Education and a Bachelor of Arts degree from St. Thomas University in Political Science.

1/3www.sidoamerica.org/About-Us.aspx

Forgot your password?

Member Login

Username:

Password:

Events

March 27, 2012

Selling to the World: Turning

International Event Leads into

Sales more

See Full Calendar

News March 17, 2009

US Chamber: Increasing Exports

a Key to Reigniting U.S. Economy

more

The SIDO network share examples

of best practices in the members

forum, offering advice on grant

programs, measurements, trade

missions and a host of other

activities central to state

international trade programs. Join

SIDO and start exchanging!

About Us Last Updated: 6/18/2012

The State International Development Organizations, Inc. (SIDO) is the

premiere U.S. organization dedicated to supporting state international

trade agencies. SIDO is the only national organization focused exclusively

on state international trade development. SIDO helps state international

trade agencies better serve American exporters by sharing innovative ideas

and resources, developing the skills of state trade professionals,

advocating the interests of states in trade promotion, and facilitating

multi-state collaboration.

State international trade agencies are widely recognized as leaders in

innovative, performance-based trade development assistance and export

promotion. Physically located in their respective states, international trade

staff communicate regularly with constituents, business leaders and

international contacts. State international staff work directly with small to

medium-sized exporters, providing trusted guidance as they strengthen our

economy through exporting. The resources available for international trade

promotion and the strategies used to promote these programs vary

significantly from state to state. SIDO provides a forum for practitioners to

learn from each other and directly impact our local and national economies.

Through a close partnership with The Council of State Governments (CSG),

SIDO members contribute specialized expertise, information and resources

to support the overall goal of promoting state international trade

programs. SIDO offers a mechanism by which members can access helpful

directories, seek out best practices from other state agencies, expand their

international contacts and resources, and utilize a wide array of additional

products and services. SIDO also provides a vital forum for bringing issues

to a broader, collective audience.

Mission Statement

SIDO provides state trade promotion professionals with a forum for

collaboration and sharing best practices as well as advocates for states’


international trade development issues so that U.S. companies remain

globally competitive.

Organization

SIDO is a non-profit, nonpartisan organization, affiliated with The Council

of State Governments (CSG), that is comprised of international economic

development practitioners and professionals from state and related

organizations across the country. SIDO employs a part-time staff liaison,

based in CSG’s Washington office, to coordinate program activities.

However, SIDO relies primarily on the active involvement of state trade

directors from across the country, including SIDO’s board of directors, to

ensure that all activities are focused on the immediate needs of the states

and to limit overhead expenses.

Guiding Principles

Exporting increases the competitiveness of existing industries,

increases companies’ profits, and increases employees’ wages.

Through exporting, good companies become better companies.

States generally collaborate on trade promotion programs and

increased collaboration benefits the trade promotion profession.

A strong trade economy benefits national security.

Exporters generally seek assistance first at the local level so states

are in an ideal position to assist their local exporters.

State trade promotion programs are ideally situated to identify gaps

between services offered by the federal government and those needed

within their state and develop solutions to fill these gaps.

There are many U.S. companies with the ability to export but do not

export due to lack of time, talent, or money. Federal or state agencies

alone cannot service the needs of all potential U.S. exporters.

Therefore, greater state-federal collaboration is essential to assure

that that trade assistance is client-focused and client-driven, with

less bureaucracy and without duplication of efforts.

Leadership President: Wade Merritt, Maine International Trade Center

Vice-President: Jean Davis, North Carolina Department of Commerce

Treasurer/Ex Officio:

Manny Mencia, Enterprise Florida

Board Members Midwest region:

Katie Clark, Minnesota Trade Office

Ann Pardalos, Missouri Department of EconomicDevelopment

Eastern region:

Pete O'Neill, Pennsylvania Center for Trade Development

Signe Pringle, Maryland Department of EconomicDevelopment

Southern region:

Hilda Lockhart, Alabama Development Office

Jean Davis, North Carolina Department of Commerce

Western region:

Alan diStefano, Nevada Commission on EconomicDevelopment

SESSION NOTES

REFLECTION

QUESTIONS

Think of three specific examples of how the information that you just heard can be relevant and valuable to an existing customer. Think of three specific examples of how your agency can work with the agency/offering previously presented for the benefit of your customers. How will this value translate to the customer’s customer?

manuel a. mencia senior vice president...

Documents