When Siemens joined Robots for America as a founding member, the coalition’s executive director made a point that deserves attention beyond policy circles: automation and a skilled workforce grow together. Siemens backed that with a commitment to train 200,000 electricians and manufacturing experts in the United States by 2030.

The same principle applies at the other end of the production line. When a European or Asian manufacturer opens a new automated factory in the U.S., it will buy the latest equipment, controls and digital twins. But whether that equipment turns into output on schedule depends on two key hires, the plant manager and the operations leader. Here are four key decisions to consider when making those hires.

1. Timing

The natural tendency is to hire the plant manager when the building is almost completed. But that decision comes after the most critical choices have been made: plant layout, automation partner, shift patterns, staffing model and initial hourly hiring.

It’s better to bring the site manager in when those decisions are still being made. The site manager who helps commission the lines will understand why they’ve been designed the way they have, and take ownership of the ramp-up targets. They’ll have had some time to build a relationship with the local workforce development board, the local community college and utilities. And senior-level candidates who are still in full-time work may require notice periods and unvested incentives to get them out the door, so the recruitment process should start well before you need them on site.

2. People skills vs. engineering skills

It’s very easy to default to hiring the most skilled engineer possible in a highly automated plant. Having someone with technical depth is essential, as they need to be able to push back against system integrators, interpret OEE data and make sound decisions around maintenance and uptime.

But automation doesn’t eliminate the human-resources problem; it just changes it. You’re going to be running your plant with fewer workers, but they need to be much more skilled. And, according to estimates cited in the Robots for America announcement by Deloitte and The Manufacturing Institute, there are currently approximately 500,000 open manufacturing jobs in the United States, which could rise to as many as 2.1 million unfilled positions by 2030.

A plant manager who can’t recruit, train and retain controls engineers, technicians and maintenance staff will find their expensive equipment underperforming.

The ideal candidate should combine both sets of skills. Look for someone who has previously managed a start-up or major expansion of an automated operation, and can demonstrate how they developed and maintained a technical workforce in a tight labor market. Interview questions should test for both, using specific real-world scenarios, not just abstract answers.

3. Domestic vs. expatriate hire

Overseas manufacturers face a dilemma here. Hiring a trusted engineer from headquarters provides continuity of process and product knowledge and familiarity with how the parent company does business. That knowledge is valuable during technology transfer.

An American plant manager will provide something that an expat would have to learn on the job: knowledge of U.S. employment law and practices, the OSHA standards, local supplier networks, state incentive agreements and local labor force management expectations.

There’s no clear answer, but the decision should be deliberate. Two viable models exist:

• American plant manager with expatriate technical lead. The plant manager manages the site and the people, while the headquarters manager is responsible for technology transfer for a specified period.
• Expatriate plant manager with strong American deputy. This can work for a short initial period, provided there’s a clear transition plan and timetable for handing control over to an American manager.

The most dangerous approach is the unintended one: sending over an engineer “temporarily” without a successor, a local deputy or a set end date.

4. Reporting lines

Reporting lines determine how quickly your plant will be able to react. If every capital expenditure, hiring decision or schedule change requires approval from headquarters several time zones away, your American plant manager will lose credibility with their team and their customers.

Prior to making the hire, the parent company should set out three key elements:

• Decision-making authority. How much spending and hiring authority the plant manager has, and what must be escalated to headquarters.
• Dual reporting. Whether the plant manager reports to a U.S. entity head, global operations executive or both, and how any conflicting directives will be resolved.
• Meeting cadence. A regular schedule for operational and financial reviews, ensuring a consistent approach to oversight rather than sporadic interventions.

Good candidates will ask about these issues. Transparent answers are crucial if you want to attract the right person, and they will also prevent unnecessary conflict between a foreign parent company and its U.S. operation.

A leadership hire is part of your automation investment

It takes months to specify equipment, evaluate systems integrators and calculate return-on-investment. The leadership hire should receive similar attention, with a clear job description, a defined timeline and a reporting structure agreed before the job offer is made.

Automation and a skilled workforce grow together, and that workforce starts with the person who’s hired to run the plant.