Stop me if you've heard this one
A reader sends along this "modern parable," which I'll bet has been on the intertubes for a while:
A Japanese company (Toyota) and an American company (Ford) decided to have a canoe race on the Missouri River. Both teams practiced long and hard to reach their peak performance before the race. On the big day, the Japanese won by a mile.The Americans, very discouraged and depressed, decided to investigate the reason for the crushing defeat. A management team made up of senior management was formed to investigate and recommend appropriate action. Their conclusion was that the Japanese team had 8 people rowing and 1 person steering, while the American team had 8 people steering and 1 person rowing.
Feeling a deeper study was in order, American management hired an independent consulting company and paid them a large amount of money for a second opinion. They advised, of course, that too many people were steering the boat, while not enough people were rowing.
Not sure of how to utilize that information, but wanting to prevent another loss to the Japanese, the rowing team's management structure was totally reorganized to 4 steering supervisors, 3 area steering superintendents, and 1 assistant superintendent steering manager. They also implemented a new performance system that would give the one person rowing the boat greater incentive to work harder. It was called the 'Rowing Team Quality First Program,' with meetings, dinners, and free pens for the rower. There was discussion of getting new paddles, canoes, and other equipment, extra vacation days for practices and bonuses.
The next year the Japanese won by two miles.
Humiliated, the American management team laid off the rower for poor performance, halted development of a new canoe, sold the paddles, and canceled all capital investments for new equipment. The money saved was distributed to the Senior Executives as bonuses and the next year's racing team was outsourced to India. Sadly, The End.
Here's something else to think about: Ford has spent the last thirty years moving all its factories out of the U.S., claiming they can't make money paying American wages. Toyota has spent the last thirty years building more than a dozen plants inside the U.S. The last quarter's results: Toyota made 4 billion dollars in profits while Ford racked up 9 billion dollars in losses.
Ford folks are still scratching their heads.
| Posted at 12:40 PM | Permalink |
|
Comments (10)
yes, there is a lot of truth there - but also look into Toyota's non-union plants which allow it to be much more flexible with it's manufacturing that the union dominated "Big 3" in Detroit...Toyota treats their employees great, but don't have to deal with union red tape when revising production or plant utilization....
Posted by Burk54 | May 30, 2008 3:13 PM
Because Toyota's management is only concerned with long-term growth, they prosper. Ford's management is only concerned with today's stock price, which is why they fail
Posted by Pdx632 | May 30, 2008 4:17 PM
Ford got tagged with Union labor, leading to the eventual demise of Detroit and large cities in the upper Midwest. While non-union Southern states, picked up Toyota. Here's a lesson for those like Obama. He'll throw up the trade and labor barriers for you, but it will eventually lead to less competitiveness and more economic rot. Strength comes from competitiveness foremost with a dash of community thrown in once in awhile.
Posted by Bob Clark | May 30, 2008 4:22 PM
All you anti-worker commentators prove is that you either can't read or you learned nothing from reading this parable. You're advocating worsening the workers' conditions and reducing their number, which is exactly backwards. Re-read the story!
Posted by dyspeptic | May 30, 2008 6:08 PM
"You're advocating worsening the workers' conditions and reducing their number, which is exactly backwards. "
Oh is that what Toyota has been doing to?
They must have a lot of unahppy employees then.
You better go Re-read something!
Posted by Howard | May 30, 2008 6:22 PM
The Big Three (especially Ford) also have something Toyota does not -- huge, unfunded, unsustainable pension liabilities that they have been trying to dump for years.
This should come as no surprise to those living in Portland, of course.
Posted by MJ | May 31, 2008 4:56 AM
dyspeptic, I don't see any anti-worker comments. What I see is anti-union comments. The two are not the same.
Posted by Richard/s | May 31, 2008 8:05 AM
Hmm...I didn't see any anti-worker comments. Or even anti-union comments. What I see is manager overload.
Posted by Max | May 31, 2008 9:51 AM
Meanwhile, GM has been moving manufacturing to it's plants in Canada. They figure they save $800 in manufacturing costs per car due to the Canadian Health Care system.
Greg C
Posted by Greg C | May 31, 2008 9:59 AM
All you anti-worker commentators prove is that you either can't read or you learned nothing from reading this parable. You're advocating worsening the workers' conditions and reducing their number, which is exactly backwards. Re-read the story!
not anti-worker, my comments were about Toyota's ability to be more nimble in changing plant useage due to their plants being non-union...they have great compensation plans and benefits and that is why their plant employees continually vote against organizing...nothing anti-worker there...
Posted by Burk54 | May 31, 2008 10:07 PM