Source(s): MAPI Foundation Figure 1 – Percent Who Engaged in Automation Investment in the Prior 5 Years and Who Plan to Engage in Automation Investment in the Coming 3 Years

Source(s): MAPI Foundation Figure 2 – Percent Whose Automation Investment Was or Will Be a Stand-Alone Investment Versus a Broader Upgrade of Company Technology Infrastructure

Figure 3 – Percent Whose Automation Investment of the Next 3 Years Will Be a Broader Upgrade of Automation Versus a Complete Asset Base Upgrade Source(s): MAPI Foundation

Figure 4 – Pace of Automation Technology Implementation in the Prior 5 Years Source(s): MAPI Foundation

Figure 5 – Primary Reasons for the Slow Pace of Automation Technology Implementation in the Prior 5 Years Source(s): MAPI Foundation

Figure 6 – Top 5 Drivers of Automation Investment in the Prior 5 Years Source(s): MAPI Foundation

Percent Output of all production employees per unit of time39% Output of all employees per unit of time, both production and non-production29% Gross profits per unit of time of all production workers14% Gross profits per unit of time of all workers, both production and non-production16% Time to market1% Other1% Table 1 – Distribution of Productivity Metrics Used by Respondents Who Indicated That Workforce Productivity Improvement Was a Driver of Automation Investment in the Prior 5 Years Source(s): MAPI Foundation

Figure 7 – Top 6 Reasons for Not Engaging in Automation Investment During the Prior 5 Years Source(s): MAPI Foundation

Figure 8 – Top 5 Criteria for Evaluating the Performance of New Automation Technology Source(s): MAPI Foundation

Figure 9 – Share by Size Cohort of Respondents Who Have Engaged in Automation Investment During the Past 5 Years and Plan to Do So During the Next 3 Years

Source(s): MAPI Foundation Figure 10 – Share Within Size Cohorts of Survey Respondents Whose Automation Investment Was Part of a Broader Effort With Their Company’s Technology and Will be Part of a Broader Effort With Their Company’s Technology

Source(s): MAPI Foundation Figure 11 – Share Within Size Cohorts of Survey Respondents Whose Automation Investment During the Coming 3 Years Will be Part of a Broader Upgrade of Automation Versus a Complete Asset Base Upgrade

Prior 5 Years Coming 3 Years Prior 5 Years Coming 3 Years Food, beverage, and tobacco81%77%Nonmetallic mineral products89% Textile mills and textile product mills94%86%Primary metals87%89% Apparel, leather, and allied products88%78%Fabricated metal products91%75% Wood product87%85%Machinery90%79% Paper products94%77%Computer and electronic products89%80% Printing and related support activities90%78% Electrical equipment, appliances, and components 98%91% Petroleum and coal products90%87%Transportation equipment83%77% Chemical products81%85%Furniture and related products100%86% Plastics and rubber products92%83%Other71%59% Table 2 – Share Within Industry Cohorts of Respondents Who Engaged in Automation Investment During the Prior Five Years and Who Plan to Engage in Automation Investment During the Coming Three Years Source(s): MAPI Foundation

Prior 5 Years Food, beverage, and tobacco 45% Nonmetallic mineral products38% Textile mills and textile product mills 40% Primary metals38% Apparel, leather, and allied products35%Fabricated metal products38% Wood product28%Machinery43% Paper products29%Computer and electronic products52% Printing and related support activities47% Electrical equipment, appliances, and components 44% Petroleum and coal products41%Transportation equipment52% Chemical products33%Furniture and related products0% Plastics and rubber products39%Other42% Table 3 – Share Within Industry Cohorts of Respondents Whose Automation Investment During the Prior Five Years Was Part of a Broader Effort With Their Company’s Technological Infrastructure Source(s): MAPI Foundation

Percent <$200M28% $200M to <$1B29% $1B to <$3B14% $3B to <$5B9% $5B to <$10B10% $10B to <$25B5% ≥ $25B 5% Table A1 – Distribution of Respondents by Size (Average Annual Global Sales Revenue for the Prior Three Fiscal Years) Source(s): MAPI Foundation

Percent Food, beverage, and tobacco21%Nonmetallic mineral products7% Textile mills and textile product mills12%Primary metals9% Apparel, leather, and allied products12%Fabricated metal products8% Wood products12%Machinery17% Paper products13%Computer and electronic products24% Printing and related support activities12% Electrical equipment, appliances, and components 11% Petroleum and coal products7%Transportation equipment9% Chemical products10%Furniture and related products2% Plastics and rubber products16%Other4% Table A2 – Distribution of Respondents by Industry Source(s): MAPI Foundation

Percent CEO29% Global supply chain9% Global manufacturing15% Global operations13% Engineering/R&D8% Technology18% Other8% Table A3 – Distribution of Respondents by Area of Company Source(s): MAPI Foundation

Percent <20%23% 20% to <40%24% 40% to <50%30% 50% to <75%16% 75% to <90%5% ≥ 90% 3% Table A4 – Distribution of Respondents by Share of Operating Revenue From Operations Outside of the U.S. (Average of the Prior Three Fiscal Years) Source(s): MAPI Foundation