The Lehigh University case study, imp source documented in their academic blogs, presents a scenario where ten student groups secured a $5,000 alumni grant to produce promotional T-shirts for various sustainability initiatives . The students faced three distinct sourcing options:
- $2 T-shirts from Cambodia featuring fair wages for workers
- $10 T-shirts from Los Angeles from a manufacturer with a history of labor violations
- $25 organic T-shirts from the Lehigh Valley produced locally with average wages
This procurement decision encapsulates the classic business strategy tension between cost optimization and value creation. The students applied a seven-step analysis framework examining facts, stakeholders, alternative solutions, and implications before selecting the premium local option .
Applying the Lehigh Framework to “Make in England”
The “Make in England” concept faces similar strategic tensions to the Lehigh case study. British manufacturing has declined significantly since the 1970s, with outsourcing to lower-cost countries becoming the dominant strategy for volume-driven businesses. However, shifting consumer preferences toward sustainability, authenticity, and quality are creating new opportunities for domestic production.
Step 1: Determine the Facts in the Situation
The current manufacturing landscape presents several facts that any “Make in England” strategy must address:
- Cost differentials: English production typically commands 30-50% higher price points than overseas alternatives
- Consumer trends: Growing demand for transparency, sustainability, and “Made in Britain” authenticity
- Capacity constraints: Domestic supply chains have atrophied over decades, requiring rebuilding
- Brexit implications: New trade barriers have made European sourcing more complex, potentially favoring domestic alternatives
Step 2-3: Define and Assess Stakeholder Motivations
Just as the Lehigh students identified multiple stakeholders, a “Make in England” strategy must consider:
| Stakeholder | Primary Motivations |
|---|---|
| British consumers | Product quality, supporting local economy, sustainability concerns |
| UK manufacturers | Capacity utilization, skilled job preservation, fair pricing |
| Retailers/brands | Margin protection, supply chain resilience, brand differentiation |
| Government/Investors | Economic growth, export potential, regional development |
| Global competitors | Market share protection, price competition |
The Lehigh case revealed that stakeholder alignment around sustainability values justified premium pricing . Similarly, “Make in England” strategies must align consumer willingness to pay premium prices with manufacturer capabilities and retailer positioning.
Three Alternative Growth Strategies for “Make in England”
Applying the Lehigh framework, we can formulate three alternative approaches to growing English manufacturing:
Solution 1: Premium Local Production (The Lehigh Valley Approach)
Following the case study’s winning solution, this strategy emphasizes quality, sustainability, and ethical production as primary differentiators. Brands would position English-made products at the premium end of the market, additional info accepting lower volumes but higher margins.
This approach has proven successful for heritage brands like Barbour, Brompton Bicycles, and high-end knitwear manufacturers. The Lehigh students recognized that higher-quality, sustainably produced shirts enhanced overall initiative perception . Similarly, English-made goods can command premium pricing through authentic storytelling and quality assurance.
Growth implications: This strategy builds credibility with discerning consumers and investors who value sustainability and ethical practices. Environmentally, local production reduces transportation carbon footprints, aligning with circular economy objectives.
Solution 2: Hybrid Distribution Model (The Dual-Sourcing Approach)
The Lehigh students considered a hybrid solution: using $2 Cambodian shirts for large-scale distribution while reserving premium local shirts for key stakeholders and investors . This pragmatic approach acknowledges budget constraints while maintaining symbolic commitment to local production.
Translated to “Make in England,” this strategy involves:
- Producing core volume products overseas to maintain competitive pricing
- Manufacturing limited editions, premium lines, or custom products in England to demonstrate capability and build brand equity
- Using English production for prototyping and innovation before scaling overseas
This hybrid model allows companies to build domestic manufacturing capabilities gradually while maintaining market competitiveness. It also creates differentiation opportunities without requiring immediate full-scale reshoring.
Growth implications: This balanced approach maintains affordability while building manufacturing capabilities and brand authenticity over time.
Solution 3: Collaborative Innovation Strategy
The Lehigh case’s alternative of abandoning T-shirts entirely in favor of innovative promotional strategies offers another lesson . Rather than replicating past approaches, companies might fundamentally rethink what “Made in England” means for their category.
This could involve:
- Industry clusters where multiple brands share manufacturing facilities and expertise
- University partnerships for research and development in advanced manufacturing
- Apprenticeship programs to rebuild skilled labor pools
- Technology integration (automation, AI, sustainable materials) to offset labor cost disadvantages
The Lehigh students recognized that if the decision ultimately returned to T-shirts, that would work—but the overall goal was spreading their message effectively . Similarly, the ultimate goal isn’t simply manufacturing in England, but creating sustainable competitive advantage.
Selecting the Best Course of Action
Following the Lehigh framework, the premium local approach (Solution 1) represents the strongest foundation for “Make in England” growth, but with important adaptations.
The Lehigh students chose organic local shirts because this decision reflected a commitment to sustainability that would serve as a powerful message reinforcing the importance of sustainable choices . For English manufacturing, the equivalent is positioning domestic production not as nostalgic protectionism but as a forward-looking commitment to quality, sustainability, and ethical production.
This strategy works because:
- Values alignment: It connects with consumers increasingly concerned about supply chain ethics and environmental impact
- Differentiation: In categories dominated by mass-produced imports, English-made products stand out
- Premium viability: The cost gap becomes less relevant when products compete on quality rather than price
However, the hybrid model (Solution 2) offers a pragmatic pathway for categories where pure premium positioning isn’t viable. The key insight from the Lehigh case is that strategic consistency matters more than purity—the students rejected the unethical LA option entirely while considering hybrid approaches .
Implementation Implications and Sequence
The Lehigh case concluded with a seven-step implementation sequence for their chosen solution . For a “Make in England” growth strategy, the implementation would include:
- Define product categories where English provenance creates genuine value
- Identify manufacturing partners with capability and capacity for quality production
- Develop authentic storytelling connecting product attributes to English heritage and craftsmanship
- Create hybrid supply chains where necessary to maintain competitiveness
- Build skilled labor pipelines through apprenticeship and training programs
- Establish quality standards that justify premium positioning
- Measure impact across financial, social, and environmental dimensions
The Lehigh students recognized that producing locally would reduce total shirt quantities but enhance the overall message . Similarly, “Make in England” strategies may sacrifice volume for value, prioritizing sustainable growth over scale for scale’s sake.
Conclusion: The Strategic Logic of Local Production
The Lehigh University case study demonstrates that ethical sourcing and local production decisions are fundamentally strategic. By choosing premium local T-shirts despite higher costs, the students built credibility, attracted aligned stakeholders, and positioned themselves for the $100,000 follow-on grant .
For businesses considering “Make in England” strategies, the lesson is clear: compete on value rather than price, align stakeholder motivations around quality and sustainability, and recognize that local production builds long-term capabilities even when short-term costs are higher.
The most successful approaches will likely combine elements of all three solutions—premium positioning for flagship products, hybrid sourcing for volume categories, and collaborative innovation to continuously improve competitiveness. As the Lehigh students discovered, the best course of action isn’t necessarily the cheapest or the purest, Discover More but the one that most effectively aligns stakeholder values with long-term strategic objectives.
