Everyone thinks that the Internet has been the cause of a decline in print; the real cause has been the lasting legacy of desktop publishing in the grander computer revolution.
Last month, U.S. commercial printing employment was below 600,000, which caught my attention. I went straight to my library of industry statistics. As best as I can determine using various government data, we're at levels not seen since 1986 or 1987. Commercial printing employment peaked in mid-1998, almost reaching 830,000. It's been quite a change from 1987 to now.
At that time, there were 70,000 employees in prepress trade shops (separators, platemakers, and trade typographers). Today, there are 25,000 with most of them are in some high-level publishing workflow, with nary a sense of what platemaking, separating, or typography was or might have been.
In 1987, there were 176,000 employees in book, magazine, and miscellaneous publishing; there are 300,000 today, augmented by another 50,000 or so micropublishing entrepreneurs.
Desktop publishing reduced the costs of production and stimulated the content creation process, and was a critical component of the march of new media. In 1987, graphic design did not even have its own industry classification code, as it was buried in something called "commercial art and design." Many of these workers referred to themselves as “illustrators.” About 52,000 employees worked in graphic design firms then, with another 4000 or so as freelancers. Today, there are 73,000 employees in graphic design firms, plus another 90,000 freelancers, more than three times the workers.
Even advertising employment is higher. There are even 40,000 more workers in advertising than in 1987.
Commercial printing employment is now at 1987 levels, while publishing, design, and agencies have added more than 250,000 workers in the last 20 years. Not all of them are creative workers, of course. Without the ability to create content efficiently, even those workers who are not in content creation or content production positions owe their jobs to the creation process that is the reason for their employer's existence.
The loss of prepress has hurt our industry's financial performance, especially its profitability. In turn, the technological changes that undermined our industry created new opportunities. “Creative destruction” is a phrase used by economists to explain how technology and other factors destroy old ways of doing things and replace them with more productive methods, new products, and sometimes entirely new industries. Your perception of the effect depends on whether your skills are the ones being replaced. There is no doubt that the technologies and entrepreneurs that coalesced around desktop publishing two decades ago are still having ripple effects in our industry.
It is curious that the 230,000 loss in print workers in the last ten years is almost the same as the 250,000 new workers in content creation industries, isn't it?
There is another important point. The new workers are more inclined to be freelance professionals, working as sole practitioners, than ever before. A $10,000 Mac workstation today is a powerful production tool, capable of producing sophisticated, high quality media in almost any format. They're not always working alone, however. These workers are more likely to be working on a project basis rather than with a single employer, linked with other independent professionals, each with a unique expertise. Modern telecommunications and the Internet are only a hint of what is to come. Printing organizations need to recognize this empowered freelance revolution.
I am often asked what would draw more young people to the printing industry. I have always heard the same tired recommendations in my 30 years in the business, and we know they don't matter. There is only one thing that does it: successful, dynamic, and growing companies that do interesting and exciting things. One of the attractions to content creation businesses is the newness that is the essence of their projects: there is always some aspect of the content that has never been done before. Creating content, even in its necessary repetitive production tasks, is more attractive to young workers. Working as freelance plays into millennial generation themes of independence, time flexibility, and geographic freedom.
Manufacturing by its nature may not be able to compete with that. Quality control programs, for example, are designed to create a repetitive and predictable sameness of results without regard to content. Small print businesses may not be able to compete with the attraction to the content creation businesses unless its owner or management is somewhat charismatic, emanating a sense that the risk of tagging along will be worth it in the long run.
In the end, falling under 600,000 employees is just a number. It's a reminder of where we've been, and what may come. It's a reminder of how much the communications business has changed, and will change. The question is whether our industry's entrepreneurial spirits will create, individually and collectively, that successful, growing, dynamic, and intriguing culture that attracts workers and capital for these decades ahead.
Read more from Dr. Joe Webb in WhatTheyThink.com's Economics and Research Center
Discussion
By Brian Regan on Aug 07, 2008
Interesting.
I do a lot of work using various personality tests. I focus a lot of attention on the nature side and then factor in the nurture side at a later point. From my standpoint it i a clear divide between tech people and creative people, with some cross over into both.
Printing offers both sides the tech and creative. While I think the former is a larger % of the population the latter has a strong presence.
What interests me the most is the growing demand in our industry for people that understand programming, IT, and other tech disciplines. And yes, this includes the operation of the newer presses and digital equipment.
There are a lot of compelling reasons to want to come into this industry. We just need to understand who and what we are looking to attract.
By Michael J on Aug 07, 2008
Brian -
There is a sometimes overlooked job in the printing industry that combines creative with tech intelligent - the salesperson.
With the competition in the industry, almost every company has room for a good salesperson. For those printers who have moved to the internet to get sales, the job title is business development.
My sense is that getting top quality IT people to move into print is a hard sell. The best all want to work for either Google or a start up.
On the other hand, a smart, creative saleperson who knows how to anticipate customer's needs, help manage a project from idea to completion is very rare and thus very valuable.
All those liberal arts majors who are interested in communication can have a career that can be very renumerative, has lots of room for creativity, and brings in the cash that keeps the whole thing moving forward.
By Erik Nikkanen on Aug 07, 2008
The goal of manufacturing is to have consistency but the effort to obtain consistency and predictability is very creative. It can be very challenging and very interesting. Not trying is what is dull.
One problem with printing as a manufacturing process is a lack of statistical capability to print with visual consistency. This fact is covered up or ignored or just not understood but the potential of control can lead to competitive advantages. All the low hanging fruit have not been picked.
Improving the capability of the manufacturing process is mainly the job of engineers and not graphic arts graduates. Dr. Joe. Do you have any statistics on how many engineers are in the printing industry compared to other industries? I don't mean people who have the title of engineer but people who have graduated from engineering schools. My guess is that the printing industry has a very low level of engineers employed.
Engineers are taught the theory and application of physics. They should be able to evaluate problems as they come along or at least be able to evaluate different views of technology. They do this quite well in other industries.
One of the great weaknesses in the printing industry is that there are not enough people educated in science. Most educators and many researchers are not trained in science or they have an education in very narrow fields. The result is that some very critical problem that are relatively simple to solve, have been missed for many decades. This is where the opportunities are, to do creative work in making the process boringly consistent.
By Michael J on Aug 08, 2008
Eirk-
I agree 100% about the importance of science in the printing industry. Today the engineers are working for the vendors. The engineering in every new release of the machinery keeps getting better and better.
On the ground, Printing is an distributed custom manufacturng industry managed by craftspeople. Their practice is informed by experience, not formal training.
As the environment continues to change, craft knowledge is not good enough to thrive. Doing more with less needs science. It's all about controlling the process to make it more efficient and sustainable.
The good news is that some firms are getting very close to "lights out manufacturing." The bad news is that it requires a scientific/engineering mindset as opposed to a craftsperson mindset.
Consider that the sales process is also amenable to a scientific approach. On that side it is more about anthropology than engineeering. But process control is as important.
The big buzz (but not yet the common practice) in graphic arts education is using anthropoligical research methods to inform marketing and communication.
It see what this can look like, check out
http://www.cultureby.com . The blogger has a PHd. in anthropology and has taught at Harvard Business School.
By Bitterman on Aug 08, 2008
Michael J-
With all due respect, all industries require a sales function. It is the inability of sales to create demand which has caused the displacement of prepress workers like myself. My background is on the creative side, I evolved up through the technology and now I am an expert in many areas of prepress, QC, and have been a Digital Printing manager for the past several years. That sales people and shop owners do NOT come from either a creative OR scientific background on the whole is the primary cause of this prepress displacement. If anything, the industry needs fewer sales people, or "business development" people. The numbers are already out of proportion. Most shops are so top heavy that the few production jobs left are a nightmare of stress, low wages and turnover.
I envision a dystopian future where print shops are actually teams of "sales people" cannibalizing each other for the three remaining clients who still use traditional static print. Those jobs are sent to some onlne vendor in India or China. Then they all congratulate each other on how "green" they've become.
By Michael J on Aug 08, 2008
Bitterman -
You say "It is the inability of sales to create demand which has caused the displacement of prepress workers like myself."
I don't think that sales can "create demand".
What they can do, if they are pros, is to find the people who want to buy what the company can produce efficiently and profitably. And they can expertly understand, anticipate and communicate the customer's needs to the inside folks who make it happen.
Sure, not every sales person is great. But then neither is every prepress or production person.
As for displacement of prepress people, I would blame that more on Adobe and the improvements in the manufacturing process.
No doubt some print companies wither. But others thrive. Just the way it is. It doesn't make sense to blame it one person or one department.
For an outift to thrive you need great leadership, great production people and a great sales functionality. Each is necessary. None can do it alone.
As just one of many examples, http://printingforless.com seems to be doing just fine. It's all traditional offset, with a web front end, and teams of CSR/SalesReps to keep it all moving. All the printing is done in Montana.
Meanwhile, I sort of agree with you on the swipe at "being green." Lots of it is well meaning, but mostly PR stuff that sounds good to every one.
If the focus were on being sustainable and doing a lot more with a lot less with a lot less waste, that would make more sense to me.
Finally, you say,
"If anything, the industry needs fewer sales people, or “business development” people".
I would respond that just as we need more science/creative based production people, we also need a science/creative based sales process that predictably works.
By Brian Regan on Aug 09, 2008
Ahh the debate between what comes first sales or operations. I tend to feel sales gives operations a reason to well exist. Without sales and driving in business no need for anyone else or any machinery.
:)
But I am a biz dev sorta guy so I might just have a bias.
By Erik Nikkanen on Aug 09, 2008
Michael,
As you might remember, I have been talking about process consistency and predictability, especially with respect to press performance for a very long time. It has now been over 12 years. The problem of density control and predictability is solvable.
Why is it that I have been the only person who wants the fundamental problems understood and solved for the industry? Graphic arts educators are not interested, printers are not interested, vendors and journalists are not interested. There is something systemically wrong with that picture.
I know what has to be done to move forward but there is no interest. Technologies may change but the basic physics does not. The Laws of Nature do not change. If one knows the physics of the problem, then one quite easily understands what the route forward needs to be to obtain predictability.
The industry is still in the Dark Ages and does not know it. Enlightenment comes when one has theories that are predictable. Crafts and technology were quite well developed in the Dark Ages, the only problem was there were few explanations for what was done.
I started looking at the density control problem in 1984 and if one keeps asking WHY does this or that happen and you think hard enough about it, you can find out why. In the end, it is not so difficult.
So I still wait for the time when people really want to know WHY and more importantly also want to do something about it.
By Michael J on Aug 10, 2008
Actually it's not as simple as sales vs. production. It's more like "both at the same time - nourishing and supporting each other.
Easy to say. Hard to do. But it is what can separate the winners from the losers. In my experience, it's a lot more important than the BIG vision or the killer app or even that next piece of software or hardware.
I also tend to be a biz dev kind of guy. The way I see it is that the essence of biz dev is "how we can build on what we already do great and find more people who are willing to pay us for it".
Then after they are found the sales people - or website or a great CSR or a team of all three - build realtionships that can turn a group of customers into a community of clients.
By Andrew Tribute on Aug 14, 2008
Going back to the atart of this dialog with Dr Joe's comments about desktop publishing, I would like to comment that it was the lack of vision by printers that started the switch of prepress from the printer to the creatives. I was perhaps one of the leading advocates for DTP in 1985-90 when it was just starting. I would speak at conferences around the world stating the DTP would totally change the industry and kill prepress operations. I even was talking about the Mac and various software applications from Aldus, Adobe, Letraset, Quark and others would take over from the big three of color, Crosfield, Hell and Scitex. I found great acceptance of my ideas among the creative community but a cynical disbelief from printers, high end prepress suppliers and prepress specialists who said I didn't know what I was talking about. A few organisations, and these were mainly in newspapers did make the move to switch to DTP, and they had great success. The printing industry lost its way at that time and the creative communities proved that with the correct tools they could do better than the printers had been able to do with the older technologies. By the time printers switched to DTP it was too late, the genie had left the bottle. At least in the 1990s digital printing and wide format inkjet printing gave the prepress specialists a new business. Today many of the top companies in this digital industry can show their origins in the prepress market. Once again however few printers made the move into digital printing, and we only saw printers switching to this technology in the early 2000s. Once again the genie had left the bottle. Today the trend is to total digital multiple media operations but few printers have moved in this direction and again external suppliers are taking on this total multiple media role.
The problem in the past with most printers is they lack the vision to see the future business opportunities and prefer to stick with what they know. What we have seen however with this is offset printers today are far more efficient than in the past with better equipment and this has brought about more efficient leaner manufacturing approaches. This may also be a reason for Dr Joe's findings that numbers in the printing industry have declined in that modern presses are more productive and use far lower levels of staffing.
The argument of whether the industry needs more scientists or sales people is important but in reality the industry needs more vision among the owners in taking an early step into new technologies.
By Michael J on Aug 14, 2008
Andy,
Disruptive innovation in any industry usually comes from outside. IBM didn't see Microsoft. Newspapers didn't see Google or Craigslist. It's hard and scary to see a threat when you are making a decent living doing what is tried and true.
If you think printers lack vision, consider the geniuses who run newspapers or the financial industry.
Erik,
You say "I have been talking about process consistency and predictability, especially with respect to press performance for a very long time. It has now been over 12 years".
Consider that the internet is only about 10 years old. Print, in the West, is about 500 years old. Offset printing was around for 30 years before it went mainstream about 60 years ago.
The price of seeing where it's going is the frustration of having to wait until it goes mainstream. What helps sometimes is to keep WIlliam Gibson's words in mind: "The future is here. It's just not evenly distributed"
By Bitterman on Aug 14, 2008
This is the most astute comment I've read in a blog post in quite a while:
"The argument of whether the industry needs more scientists or sales people is important but in reality the industry needs more vision among the owners in taking an early step into new technologies."
Thank you for that!
In my career, like they say "on the ground", (where none of us sits around a conference table discussing golf, we are actually producing what you are selling), I have experienced a "wait and see" attitude by owners of print shops. They want to see if the early adopters of some new technology can make it work, or if it just fails miserably. It's a kind of highly conservative risk management. I have also worked at a prepress shop like you describe, who got into digital printing BEFORE the mainstream, and are now thriving while others are dying. Literally.
An interesting discussion.
By Wayne Shipman on Aug 14, 2008
With all due respect to the editorial staff and commentators, I believe the real reversal is due to STANDARDS. PDF stands for Portable Document Format, and I emphasize PORTABLE. PostScript was the first chink in the armor, in a sense. How many lithographers were buried with their metal type machinery, blaming offset for reducing quality standards and cheapening the finished product?
As the industry adopted standards-based content to enable efficiencies of scale, they also allowed for competition to drive toward a commoditization of the product. We have seen this time and again. As we march forward, we adapt or die. As we wring cost out of the process, technologies that favor our businesses also are available to other businesses with whom we compete.
Those who thrive generally do so because they offer a distinction of service or product which can not be easily replicated. Creative people can now do amazing things with computers that were impossible to accomplish with even the highest-skilled craftsperson.
I can hammer out a basic newsletter, typeset, printed on a copier print engine, without ever engaging the professional printing world. It's not as good as what a team of professionals can accomplish, but it meets the need. Is that unfair? Maybe. Will I win awards? No. Will the readers of my newsletter care? NO, because they only want the content.
Remember- film, paper, presses, plates - all are intermediates. The person who has something to communicate has choices, now and always. Newspapers are intermediates for news. Magazines are intermediates for stories and pictures. Books are intermediates for authors with a story to tell. Even the individual who wishes to communicate their name, business, and contact information to another now has a choice other than a business card.
The successful business will be the one who can give the most satisfaction for the cost to the communicator. Not lowest cost, but the highest satifaction for the cost. This might be the only rule.
By Michael J on Aug 14, 2008
Wayne,
Thanks for posting. I think you've hit the nail on the head. Standards is the enabler for bringing all the pieces together in the hands of the content creators.
The ironic part is that universe of content creators has exploded. The issue now is time.
If you have the time to put your newsletter together, that's great for you. If the product is good enough, then it is good enough.
But if you don't have the time, my bet is that you would pay some reasonable amount to save you the time.
In a standards based information rich economy, the trick is not "how", but when and who. Every job is different, but that's the really creative spot for a salesperson. When and what is a customer willing to pay for saving them time?
Bitterman,
I think you should consider that "vision" is a luxury. When the bills are due every month the risk can be very high. Mostly visionaries don't make money and usually the leading edge is the bleeding edge. Plus who has the time,information or motivation to evaluate still one more risk.
I congratulate you and your team on starting and growing a new business. But I would bet that your risk of failure was much lower than a printer with lots of staff and boxes and iron that has to be fed every day.
Discussion
Only verified members can comment.