Twenty years ago, I started my career at an Asian apparel manufacturer. Tech-packs would come in from big brands from the US and Europe. We would gather in meeting rooms late into the night, deciphering the documents and pulling together a sample as best we could. If the sample was approved, we would confirm delivery dates to the brand six months in advance.
Sometimes things did not go to plan, but we tried to resolve the issues while sticking to our delivery dates. Because of the severity of the ramifications, brands usually were the last to be informed. The less diligent factories seemed to get the lion’s share of the contracts because they could offer garments at a lower cost.
A few years later, I was working in the US. On that side of the world, brands were wringing their hands over the lack of visibility and transparency across their global supply chains. In desperation, brands would penalize manufacturers and request early shipments for much more stock than they ever expected to sell. All the while demanding lower prices. The result – more mistrust, more cover-ups, and more waste.
The great East-West divide of the fashion supply chain: practical because of the incredulous wage disparity but frustrating for all parties. The system was intrinsically flawed.
A recent Forbes article illustrates today’s differing views on the future of fashion manufacturing. Kirby Best, CEO of OnPoint Manufacturing, a US-based fashion manufacturer says that the cost advantage of Asian manufacturing is a misconception — when costs such as warehousing and shipping are considered, the cost per unit of manufacturing in Asia is much greater than it seems. On the other hand, Bibhu Mohapatra, a NYC-based designer, points out that abandoning the offshore model will adversely impact artisans in Asia, such as Indian embroiderers that currently enhance and support the global fashion industry.
Things are changing. The global economy is moving away from the uncomfortable power dynamic of brands in the West dictating terms to manufacturers in the East. Brands such as Burberry are changing focus to Asian markets, as China, South Korea, and Japan suffered only a 10% drop in sales during the pandemic when compared to 75% in Europe. Asian brands, such as Japanese Uniqlo, have become internationally recognized household names in much the same way as H&M or Zara.
Globally, there has been a shift towards local manufacturing. The rise of the conscious consumer has led to a drive away from wasteful, unsustainable fast fashion towards on-demand, personalized fashion. Communication and logistical issues have resulted in the latter being seemingly easier to facilitate with proximity between the brand, the manufacturer, and the end consumer. The disruption to global supply chains during the pandemic accelerated the trend, driving home the assumption that staying local is best. For more about this topic, please read my previous blog series on fashion beyond a pandemic.
What is the new normal for post-pandemic fashion manufacturing? Is it local manufacturing for local demand? Eastern production for Eastern consumers and Western production for Western consumers? I think not. Enough of the East-West divide. Cross-cultural commerce is not a bad thing. There is a trend to equate local with small businesses and global with big corporations. But what about the small Indian businesses that produce high-quality handsewn shoes to consumers in the US? Global commerce can enrich societies by allowing them to benefit from cultures they are far removed from.