Berger champions a vision of manufacturing that thrives on innovation, contrasting with the prevalent view of it as a declining industry overshadowed by knowledge and service sectors. She emphasizes the potential for economic growth driven by technological advancements and the success of agile firms. Her focus particularly sharpens on small and medium-sized manufacturers, which constitute 98% of US manufacturing firms with 500 or fewer employees. These businesses, she argues, represent a significant opportunity for innovation and growth, especially as large tech companies continue to rely heavily on overseas production for their major product lines. Berger notes that only about one-tenth of US manufacturers currently utilize robots, a statistic she finds disappointingly low. She believes that while large-scale industries like textiles and steelmaking may not see a swift return of jobs, the potential for innovation and agility within smaller and midsize enterprises is substantial.

The machinist’s insight from Ohio encapsulates Berger’s core belief: technological progress and workforce development are intrinsically linked. "I think workers do recognize that," Berger stated from her MIT office. "People don’t want to work on technologies of the 1940s. People do want to feel they’re moving to the future, and that’s what young workers also want. They want decent pay. They want to feel they’re advancing, the company is advancing, and they are somehow part of the future. That’s what we all want in jobs."

This philosophy underpins Berger’s involvement in MIT’s new campus-wide Initiative for New Manufacturing (INM), launched in May 2025. As a co-director, Berger is instrumental in this effort to reinvigorate American manufacturing by fostering innovation and encouraging a tight integration of research, development, and production processes. This synergy allows for rapid refinement of new products and manufacturing technologies, ultimately creating high-quality jobs. MIT President Sally A. Kornbluth echoed this sentiment at the INM’s launch, stating, "We want to work with firms big and small, in cities, small towns, and everywhere in between, to help them adopt new approaches for increased productivity. We want to deliberately design high-quality, human-centered manufacturing jobs that bring new life to communities across the country."

Berger’s engagement with the Initiative for New Manufacturing is the latest phase in a career marked by intellectual curiosity and a willingness to pivot. Her early academic decades were devoted to French and European politics, focusing on rural workers, labor, and political polarization. After earning her PhD from Harvard, where she studied under renowned political scientist Stanley Hoffmann, Berger joined MIT in 1968. Her initial scholarly work included influential books like Peasants Against Politics (1972) and The French Political System (1974).

A pivotal moment in her career occurred in 1986 when she was appointed to MIT’s newly formed Commission on Industrial Productivity. Her prior research on worker politics and economic change made her a valuable contributor to this multiyear study examining the challenges facing US manufacturing, which had lost its postwar dominance to international competitors like Japan.

The commission yielded two significant outcomes. Firstly, it produced the best-selling book Made in America: Regaining the Productive Edge, coauthored by Michael Dertouzos, Richard Lester, and Robert Solow. The book, which sold 300,000 copies, highlighted the widespread concern over industrial decline and identified issues such as short-term thinking and neglected technology transfer within US manufacturing. Secondly, and more personally for Berger, the commission marked the beginning of her deep immersion in the study of manufacturing. "MIT really changed me," she reflected in 2019. "I’ve learned a lot at MIT."

Initially, Berger examined manufacturing practices in key competitor nations like Hong Kong and Taiwan, co-editing Made by Hong Kong (1997) and Global Taiwan (2005) with Richard Lester. However, her focus increasingly shifted back to US manufacturing. She played a crucial role in a five-year MIT study culminating in her book How We Compete (2006), which analyzed the drivers of outsourcing and offshoring. This was followed by her co-chairing the Production in the Innovation Economy (PIE) commission in 2010, which led to the book Making in America (2013), detailing the integration of advanced technologies in manufacturing. Her involvement in MIT’s Work of the Future study group further solidified her research, concluding that while AI and other technologies reshape the workplace, they don’t necessarily lead to mass job displacement.

Christopher Love, Raymond A. (1921) and Helen E. St. Laurent Professor of Chemical Engineering at MIT and a co-director of INM, praises Berger’s enduring impact: "Suzanne is amazing. She’s been in this space and thinking about these questions for decades. Always asking, ‘What does it look like to be successful in manufacturing? What are the requirements around it?’ She’s obviously had a really large role to play here on the MIT campus in any number of important studies."

John Hart, head of MIT’s Department of Mechanical Engineering and another co-director of INM, notes Berger’s ability to foster interdisciplinary collaboration: "She always asks challenging questions and really values the collaboration between engineering and social science and management." Love also highlights Berger’s commitment to mentorship, noting the many individuals she has trained and guided throughout her career, including Richard Locke, the current dean of the MIT Sloan School of Management. Berger also served for nearly two decades as director of MISTI, MIT’s program for international internships and study, leaving her imprint across the institute. Now in her 80s, she is a driving force behind the Initiative for New Manufacturing, even coining its name, and poses critical questions about what constitutes "new" in US manufacturing and how MIT can contribute to its revival.

The Initiative for New Manufacturing is conceived as an ongoing project, distinct from Berger’s previous research which primarily resulted in influential publications. The INM aims to actively engage with industry, having already partnered with companies such as Amgen, Autodesk, Flex, GE Vernova, PTC, Sanofi, and Siemens. Furthermore, it has launched the Technologist Advanced Manufacturing Program (TechAMP), a 12-month certificate program developed in collaboration with six universities, community colleges, and technology centers. This program aims to equip manufacturing employees and students with foundational MIT-developed manufacturing principles, fostering innovation and problem-solving skills for effective technology deployment.

To fully appreciate the INM’s mission, it’s crucial to understand the historical decline of US manufacturing. The post-World War II era was a golden age, with manufacturing contributing roughly a quarter of US GDP in the 1950s. Today, this figure hovers around 10%. While the US saw manufacturing jobs grow to 20 million by 1979, the 1980s and early 2000s witnessed significant job losses, leaving approximately 12.8 million manufacturing jobs in the US currently.

Berger acknowledges that this decline is not easily reversed. "Manufacturing at the moment is really still in decline," she states. "The number of workers has gone down, and investment in manufacturing has actually gone down over the last year." She identifies three critical consequences of diminished manufacturing capacity: a detrimental impact on national innovation, reduced ability to respond to crises (like pandemics), and significant implications for national security. "Our national security is sitting on top of a worn-out industrial base," she warns, describing the defense industrial base as reliant on outdated technology and production methods.

However, Berger’s most compelling argument centers on the symbiotic relationship between production and innovation. "Innovation is closely connected to production, and if we outsource and offshore all our production, we’re also offshoring and outsourcing our innovation capabilities," she explains. She points to the late 1980s and early 1990s as a turning point, when the ability to separate design from production through digital communication facilitated outsourcing and offshoring. This shift, coupled with market pressures rewarding companies for focusing on "core competencies," led to the dismantling of vertically integrated companies like General Electric, IBM, and DuPont, which once housed robust R&D departments and manufacturing capabilities. The closure of basic research labs, such as DuPont’s that discovered nylon, and the subsequent inability of smaller firms to replicate these foundational R&D activities, created "huge holes in the industrial ecosystem." Berger aptly summarizes this phenomenon: "Once the big firms were no longer doing those activities, other companies were left home alone," unable to sustain research or generate significant advancements, a situation that explains the current state of US manufacturing and poses the question: "The big question is, how do we rebuild this?"

Christopher Love’s work on developing a portable system for creating biologic drugs, which led to the founding of startup Sunflower Therapeutics, exemplifies a new frontier in manufacturing. This innovation, utilizing living cells for localized production, mirrors the model of a craft brewery—a small-scale manufacturer serving a local market. "Innovation can come from anywhere," Love asserts. "What you really need is access to production. This is something Suzanne has been thinking about for a long time—that proximity. The same thing can happen in biomanufacturing. If I have a great idea for a new drug or food product or new material, if I have to ship it off somewhere to figure out if I can make it or not, I lose time, I lose momentum, I lose financing. I need that manufacturing to be super close."

The evolving landscape of manufacturing embraces automation, including robots, but stresses a new equilibrium. While robots can displace workers, studies indicate that their productive use can lead to overall firm growth and increased employment. The US saw over 34,000 robot additions in workplaces in 2024, a fraction of China’s nearly 300,000. Berger advocates for proactive adoption of robotics to maintain competitiveness and prevent further decline. John Hart describes this emerging paradigm: "The emerging generation of manufacturing has this new equilibrium between automation (machines, robots), human work, and software and data. A lot of the interesting opportunities in manufacturing, I think, come from the combination of those capabilities to improve productivity, improve quality, and make manufacturing more flexible."

Companies like Redwood Materials, founded by JB Straubel, are also demonstrating the value of in-house R&D and process development, as seen in their innovative battery recycling methods. Berger emphasizes that "acquiring a new technology is one of the most important ways a company can innovate," and while innovation carries risks, a sole focus on optimization has proven detrimental.

Berger’s visits to factories often reveal a concerning reliance on vintage machinery, sometimes even machines from World War II. She recounts encountering manufacturers who actively acquire outdated milling machines. "If you have all old equipment, your productivity is going to be low, your profits are going to be low, you’ll want low-skill workers, and you’re only going to be able to pay low wages," she explains, likening this situation to a "dead-end trap."

However, Berger maintains that this is not an immutable reality. She points to successful manufacturing firms that showcase a different path. "The idea that Americans don’t like manufacturing, that it’s dirty and difficult—I think this is totally [wrong]," she asserts. "Americans really do like making things with their hands, and Americans do think we ought to have manufacturing. Whenever I’ve been in a plant where it seems well run—and the owners, the managers, are proud of their workers and recognize their accomplishments, and people are respected—people seem pleased about having those jobs."

This vision aligns with the core message from the Ohio machinist: technological advancement empowers workers. Rebuilding US manufacturing will be a gradual process, focusing on one midsize manufacturer at a time. Yet, Berger believes this endeavor is crucial for the economic well-being of communities across America. "We really see a moral imperative," she concludes, "which is to be able to reach out to the whole country to try to rebuild manufacturing."