Introduction: The decision is Mexico. The question is how.

The business case for manufacturing in Mexico is clear. Labor availability, competitive cost, proximity to customers, and tariff dynamics all point in the same direction.

The more complex question is execution. Once leadership decides on Mexico, the challenge shifts.

• How do we start quickly without missteps?

• How do we avoid compliance or labor mistakes?

• How do we scale if demand grows?

• How do we give the board operational predictability? 

Executives usually consider five familiar paths. Each can work, but each also carries execution risks that are often underestimated.

There is also a sixth option, the Manufacturing Campus, that combines speed, control, and predictability in one platform. This guide provides a comparison of all six.

The five traditional entry models for manufacturing in Mexico

1. Contract manufacturing

Definition:
Contract manufacturing means hiring an independent company in Mexico to produce your goods according to your specifications. The contract manufacturer owns the facility, employs the workforce, and manages the daily operation.

What it solves: 

• Fastest way to test the market or add capacity

• Minimal capital investment and no local entity required

• Can work as a bridge solution when demand spikes

Where it falls short: 

• You are a customer in someone else’s factory

• Limited visibility into labor practices or quality systems

• Intellectual property exposure

• Difficult to scale complex or fast-changing products

Who it fits:
Companies looking for proof-of-concept production or overflow capacity for simple, stable SKUs.

Key takeaway for executives:
Good for speed, weak for control.

2. Joint venture

Definition:
A joint venture is when you form a shared entity with a local partner in Mexico. Ownership, capital investment, and governance are split according to the agreement.

What it solves: 

• Local partner brings knowledge, networks, or supplier relationships

• Shared capital reduces upfront investment

• Can create political or community alignment

Where it falls short: 

• Shared control creates governance friction

• Misaligned incentives over reinvestment, pricing, or quality

• Difficult to exit if the partnership fails

Who it fits:
Niche cases where a local partner brings something you cannot replicate, such as proprietary technology or supplier access.

Key takeaway for executives:
Shared ownership can solve a unique problem but usually creates governance challenges.

3. Acquisition

Definition:
Acquisition means buying an existing Mexican operation. The appeal is speed: the building and workforce are already in place.

What it solves: 

• Appears to compress setup time

• May be attractive if a competitor exits and a facility/workforce becomes available

Where it falls short: 

• Legacy liabilities and compliance debt

• Layout or infrastructure mismatches that require expensive rework

• Workforce culture may not align with your company's values

• Retrofitting costs often erase the initial advantage

Who it fits:
Rare cases where a facility is a near-perfect match for your processes and equipment.

Key takeaway for executives:
Looks faster, often ends up slower and more expensive.

4. Standalone entity

Definition:
A standalone operation means forming your own Mexican subsidiary, leasing or building a facility, and directly handling all compliance, workforce, and administrative functions. You own the entity, the permits, the workforce, and the vendor relationships.

What it solves: 

• Maximum control over brand, culture, and quality

• Full independence from providers or partners

Where it falls short: 

• Long and unpredictable startup process

• Leadership pulled into permits, HR, EHS, trade, and payroll instead of production

• High overhead during early years as you duplicate administrative functions

Who it fits:
Very large, long-term programs with patient capital and an experienced Mexico leadership bench.

Key takeaway for executives:
Ultimate control comes with the ultimate administrative burden.

5. Shelter services

Definition
Shelter services allow you to operate in Mexico under the legal and regulatory umbrella of a provider. You run production while the shelter provider is the employer of record and manages compliance, payroll, HR, and foreign trade programs such as IMMEX.

What it solves

• Faster entry than forming your own entity

• Lower regulatory exposure

• Access to IMMEX benefits

Where it falls short

• Shelter usually stops at compliance

• You still manage facilities, utilities, transportation, EHS, and security separately

• Fragmentation often creates delays and hidden costs

Who it fits
Companies entering Mexico for the first time with moderate complexity.

Key takeaway for executives
Safer than going alone, but fragmented as operations scale.

The sixth model for manufacturing in Mexico: Manufacturing Campus

A Manufacturing Campus is a proven operating model for manufacturing in Mexico that has been refined over the last four decades. It combines:

• Industrial space — move-in ready Class A facilities on campus-owned land, designed to expand in place. 
• Shelter framework — IMMEX, employer of record, importer of record, manufacturer of record, and audit-ready compliance. 
• Integrated services — workforce recruiting and retention, transport, clinics, facilities, EHS, purchasing, accounting, import & export, and more. 

All under one U.S.-based contract. The result is faster startup, greater control, and operational predictability at scale.

This model works for companies of every size. Some operate with more than three thousand employees on a Campus, while others begin with fewer than one hundred. Scale happens inside the Campus footprint.

Why the Campus works: three compounding advantages

Economies of scale

Most of the real cost of starting in Mexico is not in the direct labor line but in the administrative functions around it. HR, payroll, recruiting, compliance, accounting, EHS, and transport each require people and systems. When companies build these on their own, they duplicate overhead and raise their average variable cost.

On a Campus, these functions are delivered on-site and shared across tenants. Recruiting runs continuously, payroll and accounting are centralized, transport fleets operate at capacity, and compliance teams handle multiple audits and filings.

Executive outcome: Overhead is significantly lower. Campus operations reduce non production cost by about 30 percent compared to standalone or fragmented shelter models.

Economies of scope

In traditional models, leaders juggle contracts with many providers for facilities, HR, payroll, utilities, EHS, and logistics. Every issue touches three or four vendors, creating delays and pulling management into non production work.

On a Campus, all non production services are managed by one accountable partner under one contract. Your team focuses on throughput, yield, and customer commitments instead of vendor wrangling.

Executive outcome: Productivity improves. Companies inside a Campus often achieve up to 25 percent higher output because staff remain focused on production, and management is not consumed by administration.

Economies of learning

Starting in Mexico has a steep learning curve. Permits, recruiting, labor law, audits, and certifications each carry risks. When companies learn these lessons alone, they lose months or years of value.

Campus teams have solved these problems many times across industries. Playbooks exist for startup sequences, staffing waves, certifications, and audit readiness. Retention programs keep knowledge in place.

Executive outcome: Predictable operations and faster time to value. Startups run smoother and often much faster. Some companies have gone from signing a contract to shipping finished goods in less than 30 days. 

Manufacturing Campus compared with the five traditional models

Campus vs. contract manufacturing

What executives usually hope for:
A fast way to get production going with minimal capital. You hand off the burden to a contract manufacturer and let them build to your specifications.

Where it often disappoints:
Control is limited. You are one customer among many. Quality standards, engineering changes, and labor practices may not be fully transparent. Intellectual property is exposed in someone else’s environment. Scaling is constrained by the vendor’s priorities, not your own.

How the Campus changes the equation:
The Campus gives you nearly the same speed as contract manufacturing, but in your own factory with your own processes and your own IP safeguards. Startup playbooks shorten the ramp without surrendering control. As demand grows, you expand in place on the Campus instead of moving to a new vendor.

Executive takeaway:
Contract manufacturing is speed without control. The Campus is speed with control and a path to scale.

Campus vs. joint venture

What executives usually hope for:
A joint venture provides local expertise, relationships, and shared investment. The idea is to reduce risk by partnering.

Where it often disappoints:
Shared governance is complicated. Partners rarely align on reinvestment, hiring, or pricing. Disputes emerge over priorities and quality standards. Exits are messy, and the risk of cultural misalignment is high.

How the Campus changes the equation:
A Campus delivers the same local expertise, infrastructure, and compliance support but as a coordinated service, not an equity partnership. You retain full control of production and quality while drawing on proven local knowledge. Governance stays clean and decision rights remain with you.

Executive takeaway:
Joint ventures trade control for access. The Campus provides access without losing control.

Campus vs. acquisition

What executives usually hope for:
Buying an existing facility seems like a shortcut. The building, the utilities, and the workforce are already there. In theory, you can move in and run.

Where it often disappoints:
Legacy liabilities surface. Environmental or tax issues may remain hidden until after the deal. Facility layouts often do not match your processes. Retrofitting and certification costs add time and expense. Workforce culture may not align with your standards. What looked faster ends up slower and more costly.

How the Campus changes the equation:
The Campus offers fit-for-purpose space built to modern specifications with utilities, permits, and layouts ready to adapt. There is no legacy to unwind. Compliance and workforce programs are already operating, so you enter a clean environment. As you grow, you expand in place with the same infrastructure and support team.

Executive takeaway:
Acquisition looks fast but often means inheriting hidden risks. The Campus is purpose-built and risk-reduced from the start.

Campus vs. standalone

What executives usually hope for:
Forming your own entity promises maximum independence. You own the entity, the permits, and the governance. Every decision is yours.

Where it often disappoints:
Startup takes time and attention. Leadership spends months on permits, utilities, HR, payroll, EHS, and vendor orchestration instead of focusing on throughput and customers. Overhead is high because you duplicate every enabling function from scratch.

How the Campus changes the equation:
With a Campus, you keep full control of production, quality, and brand independence, but without building the entire administrative stack yourself. Compliance, workforce, and facility infrastructure are already in place. You start faster, at lower cost, and with fewer distractions for senior leaders.

Executive takeaway:
Standalone is control with delay and distraction. The Campus is control with speed and predictability.

Campus vs. shelter

What executives usually hope for:
A shelter reduces regulatory risk and speeds entry. The legal and compliance framework is covered while you focus on production.

Where it often disappoints:
Shelter typically stops at compliance. You still have to assemble your own patchwork of providers for facilities, utilities, security, transport, and EHS. Fragmentation creates bottlenecks, hidden costs, and finger pointing when delays occur.

How the Campus changes the equation:
Shelter is built into the Campus, but the model goes further. Real estate and integrated services are coordinated under the same agreement, eliminating seams. One partner is accountable for the entire operating environment.

Executive takeaway:
Shelter is a wrapper. The Campus is the platform. One partner, one contract, fewer seams, and more predictability.

Which model makes the most sense for your Mexico manufacturing strategy? 

Each approach to manufacturing in Mexico addresses different leadership concerns. Some models are faster to start, others provide more control, and a few reduce risk in only certain areas. The comparison below summarizes how each entry path performs against the priorities that matter most to executives and boards, highlighting where the Manufacturing Campus stands apart.

Decision framework for executives

If Mexico is already the answer, the remaining risk is execution. Use these questions to decide fast and confidently.

• Do we need speed and control at the same time

• Will vendor fragmentation create unnecessary risk as complexity rises

• Do we expect to scale in the same location during the next three to five years

• Can senior leaders spend time on permits, payroll, utilities, and multiple vendors without slowing customers

• Does our board want operational predictability

If you answered yes to more than two, the Manufacturing Campus is almost always the right choice.

Frequently asked questions (FAQs)

Is a Manufacturing Campus just an upgraded shelter service in Mexico?
No. A traditional shelter is only the legal and compliance wrapper. A Manufacturing Campus is a complete platform that also includes move-in-ready industrial space and integrated services such as recruiting, payroll, facilities, transport, and EHS. Instead of coordinating six or seven different vendors, you work with one accountable partner.

How fast can we start production in Mexico on a Campus compared to other models?
Campus startups avoid the long delays that come with permits, utilities, or fragmented providers. Because the space, workforce pipeline, and compliance programs are already in place, some companies have gone from signing a contract to shipping finished goods in less than 30 days. That makes the Campus the fastest path to market while still retaining control.

Who owns production, quality, and intellectual property on a Campus?
You do. Unlike contract manufacturing or joint ventures, the Campus does not touch your processes, engineering, or IP. Your team runs production, sets quality standards, and protects customer relationships. The Campus handles the administrative and compliance environment around your operations.

Does a Manufacturing Campus work for highly regulated industries such as aerospace or medical devices?
Yes. Campuses are designed to support companies in aerospace, automotive, electronics, and medical devices. But keep in mind the Campus model is industry agnostic, if you need to be in Mexico and cannot afford to fail, it can help your reach your potential regardless of manufacturing process. 

How does a Campus reduce non production cost compared to standalone or shelter models?
Most of the cost of starting in Mexico sits outside direct labor — HR, payroll, recruiting, compliance, transport, and facilities. On a Campus, these services are shared and delivered on-site. The result is about a 30 percent reduction in non production cost compared with standalone or fragmented shelter solutions.

How is a Campus different from contract manufacturing in Mexico?
Contract manufacturing offers speed but little transparency or control. You are one customer in someone else’s factory, with exposure to their labor practices and limited ability to scale. The Campus delivers nearly the same speed but in your own factory, with your own process and IP safeguards, and the ability to expand in place.

What size of company is a Manufacturing Campus best suited for?
The model works for both small and large companies. Some firms start with fewer than 100 employees, while others operate with more than 3,000. Because scale happens inside the same Campus footprint, growth does not require new permits, vendors, or facilities.

How do we justify a Manufacturing Campus to our board or investors?
Three points resonate with boards. First, speed to value: faster time from contract to production. Second, operational predictability: reduced execution risk and fewer surprises. Third, cost efficiency: about 30 percent lower overhead compared with standalone, with productivity gains of up to 25 percent because staff focus on production rather than administration.

Closing

The case for Mexico is strong. The cost of a false start is stronger.

The Manufacturing Campus combines the speed of contract manufacturing, the compliance benefits of shelter, and the control of a standalone operation. It removes fragmentation, lowers overhead, and delivers operational predictability at scale.

If you know you need Mexico and cannot afford to fail, the Campus is how you execute with confidence.

Schedule a strategy call