They did to reliability what Volvo did for safety. But as other makers play catch-up and have IMHO reached almost the same level it frees us all up to buy their cars and not Toyotas!!!

I mean, really, from point A to B everybody is about the same today, so why not get any other car that, to the driver, conveys a better sense of beauty, pleasure or whatever than Toyota’s boring characteristics!

This is all the car maker’s paradox. As they improve very much in one area they have to outrun everybody else because everybody else catches up pretty quickly.

***
Managers begin by asking employees what the problem is with the way their work is currently being done. Next, they challenge the employees’ answer and enter into a dialogue about what the real problem is. (It’s rarely the problem showing on the surface.)

Then, they ask what is causing this problem and enter into another dialogue about its root causes. (True dialogue requires the employees to gather evidence on the gemba – the place where value is being created – for joint evaluation.)
***

This is pretty much what is described in “The Toyota Way” by Liker. When diagnosing a problem, one should ask “why” five times to get at the root cause. E.G., why did the machine stop? Because the bearing seized. Why did the bearing seize? Because it ran out of oil. Etc.

Another tenet is what Liker calls Principle 12: Go and see for yourself. And Principle 13 is “Make decisions slowly by consensus”.

Guess it really works.

What there *is*, is a hell of a lot of pride in the work that’s done, and a real two-way street of respect, something that does not exist here in NA.

The confrontational attitude between workers and management is virtually nonexistent in Japan, in part because management realized long ago that 1) satisfied and motivated workers make better product, and 2) retraining due to churn sucks.