In the early 90’s I thought Ford was really pointed in the right direction – as opposed to say – GM. But they gulped the SUV kool-aid and let too many products languish.

Did things go wrong quickly? Or did things go right for a bit and then revert to normal???

Couldn’t agree more about the reasons for doing the right thing.

In short – if you’re not making it in Asia don’t talk to us. This is beyond disruptive for suppliers who have invested heavily in NA, including Mexico. Insane.

P.S. Just happened to glance over at the right side of the screen – there’s a Chrysler ad commanding me to “Gain Stability” ($2.99/gallon promotion.) Gee – no thanks Chrysler……

James Surowecki (The Tipping Point) had a brief article in the New Yorker last week about Toyota Production System.

Closing quote: “Corporations hope that the right concept will turn things around overnight. This is what you might call the crash-diet approach: starve yourself for a few days and you’ll be thin for life. The Toyota approach is more like a regular, sustained diet—less immediately dramatic but, as everyone knows, much harder to sustain. In the nineteen-nineties, a McKinsey study of companies that had put quality-improvement programs in place found that two-thirds abandoned them as failures. Toyota’s innovative methods may seem mundane, but their sheer relentlessness defeats many companies. That’s why Toyota can afford to hide in plain sight: it knows the system is easy to understand but hard to follow. “

Management tips for us Western types: Robert Sutton’s “The No A*****e Rule” – haven’t read the book, but he has a blog about implementing these no-nonsense management principles.

GM's (and the other D1.8) attitude towards it's suppliers is the single biggest issue I have with them.

There is nothing wrong with JIT supply chain management systems per se, but with a corporation so totally devoid of business ethics like GM even the best of best practices will end up as a sham.

I have been at GM supplier quality meetings in the 'war' room more often than enough. To say that these meeting typify all that is wrong with GM is an understatment. If you want to see arrogance, childishness and ruthlessness mixed with stupidity, total disrespect in an atmosphere of tension where you can visably see people's nervousness as they wait their turn at the guillotine, that's where you will find it.

I have witnessed our plant manager berated in the most obscene way possible. I have seen people rush out of the room in tears. I saw one or our QA engineers quit his jobs on the spot because of the abuse he experienced at the hands of GM people.

I heard one GM 'engineer' I know who can barely write his own name (he is not a real engineer BTW)scream abuse and obscenities at a young female engineering intern on OUR own plant flour during a visit to the total shock and surprise of our CAW workers who were within hearing.

The workers filed a complaint with the Union to force this man to apologise. We were one of their better suppliers from a quality standpoint so I would hate to experience what their no-so-good suppliers get.

Even if GM's vehicles were world class (they're not), even if their dealer network was up to scratch with all that it entails (they'e not) I will never buy a product from this company just because of the way it treats suppliers, ever.

I really feel empathy for GM's vast number of workers and their families but when GM goes under I will shed no tears for it. My hope is that a better GM will arise from the wreckage. GM is dying in a bed of it's own making.

“It’s always the right time to do the right thing”

I think the CEO’s of the big 2.8 each need to pick up a copy of ‘The Toyota Way’.

===

Mulally wore his copy to shreds back when he was heading Boeing.

is that true? If so, then all I can say is “Wow”.

I really liked Ford and I was tempted to buy the Ford Focus Cabriolet, but when I hear stories like this, I’m reminded why I stick with the Japanese.

“Doing the right thing moves us forward” Al Gore.

Another good example is a tooling die company that was struggling and left for dead by GM and Ford – they were a sole supplier for them and couldn’t make a profit and invest back in their business. Honda met with them and invested in their company on how to compete not just in the US but on a global basis. This attitude created a very strong and competitive US tooling company – stable and reliable for Honda’s supply chain yet profitable so that the company can further invest in their future.

From the article:

Or take the story of Excello, a supplier to Ford, Honda and Toyota that used to be based here in my neck of the woods in northeast Ohio. I say “used to be” because Excello recently closed up shop for good, causing nearly 130 workers to lose their jobs. As reported by the hometown Cleveland Plain Dealer, Honda and Toyota stepped forward and agreed they would contribute to a fund for the displaced workers; Ford, on the other hand, declined to contribute.

I’m reminded of one of the key principles cited in Jeffrey Liker’s book, The Toyota Way: “Respect your extended network of partners and suppliers by challenging them and helping them improve.” Based on Ford’s relationship with Excello, the Ford Way apparently is: “Sorry, can’t help you.”

Whereas the transplants slowly built up their factories hired a nonunion workforce (at that point the union was beyond it’s good intentions when it first started and was greedy – sorry but that’s the truth), and worked with their suppliers such as helping them evolve to be more competitive and making profit to remain sustainable. What happened? Well the transplants got the pick of the litter in best parts and talent working on their items (i.e. the failure specs on parts made for Toyondassan was much more strict and often parts that failed were then accepted for the Big 2.8 b/c failure specs were a more grey area as price was the big concern).

Another good example is a tooling die company that was struggling and left for dead by GM and Ford – they were a sole supplier for them and couldn’t make a profit and invest back in their business. Honda met with them and invested in their company on how to compete not just in the US but on a global basis. This attitude created a very strong and competitive US tooling company – stable and reliable for Honda’s supply chain yet profitable so that the company can further invest in their future.