Price squeeze and NVA work
I just finished watching the FB live event : this is very interesting! As I commented on the event, I understand and agree with the point on price squeeze and the fact that technology and automatisation have very little impact in the textile industry. Nevertheless, productivity can be increased without technology by reviewing methods to remove non-value added (NVA) work. I understand the price squeeze is undeniable and very important, but is part of it compensated by reduction of NVA instead of solely increase of production intensity or VA? I believe this needs to be taken in consideration because that will be one of the first counterargument brought to your association of price squeeze to production intensification.
This being said, this links to an important ethical issue in industrial engineering. Even if we increase productivity by reducing NVA work, without endangering the employees' and environment's safety but often by increasing it, what is done with the gains? The argument most often used is that it increases the company's competitivity and, therefore, consolidates current jobs without job cuts by increasing the company's market share. This obviously cannot stand in time : a good example is Toyota, now on top of market shares and having to cut jobs to compensate for the increases in productivity.