Manufacturing Transformation Practitioner

The gap isn't
the technology.
It's the last 100 feet.

Three decades on plant floors across 600+ engagements have produced one consistent finding: implementations fail not because the technology is wrong, but because the execution system underneath it isn't built to absorb it.

The Book
Gerald Tice
About
3
Decades of manufacturing operations consulting
600+
Personal client engagements
3
Firms across industrial, consumer, healthcare & food manufacturing
MBA / ME — Entrepreneurship, UNC
MS — Applied Statistics, Penn State
BS — Ag Economics / Animal Science, UFL
CSCP · CPIM Certified
ASCM · AME Member

Gerald “Jerry” Tice is a manufacturing operations consultant with three decades and more than 600 client engagements across food and beverage, consumer products, industrial, and PE-backed portfolio companies. He is the creator of the Hundred Foot Execution Method — a framework built not from theory but from watching transformations fail at the operator level, repeatedly, and reverse-engineering why.

He serves as Managing Director of Synovate & Digital Products at Synergetics Installations Worldwide, a fifty-year-old continuous improvement consultancy. Previously he was a senior leader at The Lab Consulting and DeWolff, Boberg & Associates. He holds an MS in Applied Statistics from Penn State and an ME in Entrepreneurship from Western Carolina University.

His work focuses on a single problem: helping PE operating partners and leadership teams build the execution infrastructure that turns investment theses into operating reality.

Peace River Publishers · 2026
The Execution Gap
Why Manufacturing Transformations Fail in the Last 100 Feet
The Book

A trilogy on why transformations stall — and what to do about it

Most manufacturing transformation programs fail not because the technology was wrong, the strategy was flawed, or the investment was insufficient. They fail in the last 100 feet — the space between a well-designed system and the floor-level behaviors required to make it run.

The Execution Gap trilogy addresses this at three levels: the operating partner and senior management team, the diligence team and plant manager, and the continuous improvement practitioner. Each book is a standalone read. Together they form a complete framework for diagnosing and closing the execution gap.

01 Why Manufacturing Transformations Fail in the Last 100 Feet — PE Operating Partners & Senior Management
02 Diagnosing the EMI — Diligence Teams & Plant Managers
03 The 100 Foot Way: A Practitioner's Guide — CI Managers & External Consultants

Book 1 publishing 2026. Sign up to be notified at launch.

Kit handles confirmation — check your inbox to verify.

Writing

Selected posts from the arc

Act I · The Execution Gap
The Strategy Execution Gap Nobody Talks About
There is a gap between where strategy is made and where it lands. It is not a communication gap. It is not a culture gap. It is an execution gap.
March 2026
 Act II · The Human Side
The Operator Who Knew
Every plant has one. The operator who has been running the line for fourteen years and knows exactly what the problem is. Nobody has asked them in a very long time.
April 2026
 Act III · Data & Technology
Clean Data Is a Leadership Problem, Not an IT Problem
IT can build you the cleanest data architecture in the world. None of it matters if the data going in is wrong — and data goes wrong because of how people behave.
May 2026
 Act III · Data & Technology
Most AI in Manufacturing Is Just Expensive Reporting
The technology surfaces information. The execution system determines whether anyone acts on it. Almost all implementations are firmly in the visibility category.
May 2026
 Act III · Data & Technology
AI Embedded vs. AI Bolted On
The same platform — same vendor, same configuration — produces transformational results in one plant and zero measurable impact in another. The variable isn't the software.
May 2026
 Act IV · Private Equity
What Good Looks Like on Day 90
100-day plans are almost universally built around milestones. Long enough to show activity. Short enough to avoid accountability for outcomes.
June 2026
From the Book

A value creation story

A private equity firm acquired two ethnic food manufacturers. Both companies made the same products, had the same customers, and had their own facilities. However, they were operating with completely different production systems, standards, and cultures.

The PE firm brought us in to answer a very large, but very specific question: What do we have, and what should we do with it? They needed to understand what they had acquired and how to bring the two brands together into one operation.

That question led to a production standards reset. The reset created the baseline, which the operational assessment required. The assessment designed the improvement project. The project — run across three facilities in twenty weeks — delivered the following:

.2M
Annualized benefits
28%
Above target
4.5:1
Return on investment
10mo
Post-engagement audit confirmed

The two brands were brought together under a logo that preserved their traditions, their operational efficiencies improved under their new owner, and all three facilities remained open. Ten months after the engagement ended, an independent audit confirmed the improvements had held. Benefits were tracking at $3 to $4 million annually. The system had outlasted the project.

What matters most in this example is the durability of the system — not the dollar amount. Most manufacturing transformations produce results during the engagement and revert soon after. This one didn't. Not because the consultants were better, or the workforce was more capable, or the technology was more sophisticated. Because the execution system underneath the improvement was built correctly, in the right sequence, on the right foundation.

How a PE Operating Partner or Portfolio Operations Leader Should Read This Book

This engagement began because a PE firm needed to understand what it had acquired. The footprint analysis, the standards reset, the MOS build, the sustained audit result — that sequence is not a consulting story. It is a value creation story. And the gap it closed — the execution gap — is present in some form in every manufacturing asset you own or are considering acquiring.

This book is written for the practitioner on the floor. But the system it describes is what produces the EBITDA improvement your hold period depends on. The organizations that build it before they need the results are the ones that have the results when it matters.

The execution gap is the most expensive problem in manufacturing that almost nobody talks about by name. It lives in the space between a well-designed system and the floor-level behavior required to make it run — the last 100 feet. This book is about how to find it, close it, and build the execution architecture that makes the results last.

Diagnostic Tool

Where does your operation sit?

The Execution Maturity Index maps four levels of operational discipline. Adjust the department levels on the right — the overall EMI and ROI calculator update automatically to reflect your constraint. A plant can only perform at the level of its weakest function.

Opens print dialog — select “Save as PDF”
Execution Maturity Index
Four levels. One direction. No shortcuts.
100
75
50
25
0
Full potential
World class ~85%
Opportunity Gap
L1Hero-Dep.
L2Firing Blanks
L3Pivot Point
L4Predictable
EMI: 35
EMI Heat Map
Department-level maturity — ▲▼ to adjust
Overall: Level 2 — Emerging
Activity is happening. Results aren't following.
Active constraint
Maintenance is setting the ceiling for every other department.
Execution Gap ROI Calculator
What does closing the execution gap mean for your P&L?
Annual Revenue ($M)
COGS (%)
Current Level
Level 2 — Emerging (50%)
Target Level
Conservative (60%)
—
Partial capture
Base Case (100%)
—
Full productivity gain
Upside (130%)
—
System compounding
Estimates reflect annualized gross margin improvement from productivity gains applied to the COGS base. Actual results depend on plant-specific conditions, implementation quality, and execution discipline. These figures are illustrative — the engagement defines the defensible number.
Most operations do not sit cleanly in a level. They operate along a continuum,
often with different departments at different points.

Where does your operation sit?

The Execution Maturity Index maps four levels of operational discipline. The overall EMI is set by your constraint — the lowest-performing department. A plant can only perform at the level of its weakest function.

Execution Maturity Index
Four levels. One direction. No shortcuts.
100
75
50
25
0
Full potential
World class ~85%
Opportunity Gap
L1 Hero-Dep.
L2 Firing Blanks
L3 Pivot Point
L4 Predictable
Current constraint
EMI Heat Map
Department-level execution maturity — sample
Production
Core output function
2
Level 2 — Emerging
Firing Blanks
Maintenance
Equipment reliability
▼ CONSTRAINT
1
Level 1 — Reactive
Hero-Dependent
Quality
Inspection & standards
3
Level 3 — Predictive
Pivot Point
Warehouse
Inventory & materials
2
Level 2 — Emerging
Firing Blanks
Scheduling
Production planning
▼ CONSTRAINT
1
Level 1 — Reactive
Hero-Dependent
Overall: Level 1 — Reactive
Performance depends on specific individuals. When the hero is in the building, things run. When they're not, the system reveals itself.
Active constraint
Maintenance & Scheduling are setting the ceiling for every other department. They move first, or nothing else moves.
This is a sample diagnostic. Use the interactive tool at geraldtice.com to input your actual department levels and calculate your ROI.

Execution Gap ROI Calculator

What does closing the execution gap mean for your P&L?

Annual Revenue
$50M
COGS
65%
Current Level
Level 1 — Hero-Dep. (35%)
Target Level
Level 3 — Pivot Point (65%)
Conservative (60%)
$5.9M
Partial capture
Base Case (100%)
$9.8M
Full productivity gain
Upside (130%)
$12.7M
System compounding

Estimates reflect annualized gross margin improvement from productivity gains applied to the COGS base. Actual results depend on plant-specific conditions, implementation quality, and execution discipline. These figures are illustrative — the engagement defines the defensible number.

Use the interactive tool at geraldtice.com to model your actual numbers.
Gerald Tice · Manufacturing Transformation Practitioner