Bonneville America Forums Forums Off Topic Discussion Forums Lounge G.M vs Toyota

A Japanese company (Toyota) and an American company (General Motors) 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 the Japanese 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 a 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 1 person rowing the boat greater incentive to work harder. It was called the 'Rowing Team Quality First Program,' with meetings, dinners and free pens and a certificate of completion for the rower. There was discussion of getting new paddles, canoes and other equipment, and awarding the rower extra vacation days for practices and bonuses for exemplary performance if they won the race.

The next year the Japanese won by two miles.

Humiliated, the American management laid off the rower (a reduction in workforce) 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 "out-sourced" to India.

Sadly, “The End.”

However, sad, but oh so true! Here's something else to think about: Ford has spent the last thirty years moving all its factories out of the US, claiming they can't make money paying American wages. Toyota has spent the last thirty years building more than a dozen plants inside the US.

The last quarter's results:

Toyota makes 4 billion in profits while Ford racked up 9 billion in losses. Ford folks are still scratching their heads.

IF THIS WASN'T SO SAD IT MIGHT BE FUNNY.

It is truly sad. That's why this lifelong Chevy owner ponied up for a Toyota Camry made in Georgetown , KY. this year and I can tell you straight up it's a great car. FYI: You can always tell American built Toyota's becasue they lack the square plug on the right front bumper that's for the mandated Japanese tow hitch.

Another way to tell if the car or truck was made in the states (Toyota's anyway) is to look at the VIN if it starts with a number it was made in the states if it starts with a "J" it was made in Japan. It is sad with the state of the US automakers I realized a long time ago that US was failing and the Japanese would soon rule the auto market and I do beieve they are. Toyota is now the largest automaker in the world. Oh and by the way I swear by Toyota's. Just my opinion, for what it's worth.
Ron

Well I can tell you one major Toyota advantage M E D I A
They can do no wrong in it The brand new Tundra the great unbeatable new truck has bad camshafts the first 35000 v8s have to be replaced If it was a new GM truck or Ford there would be headlines it would be the top story on the today show how bad the new American trucks are but it was toyota with the problems wheres the headline?
Why isnt it reported that yet another toyota attempt at a full size truck fails? Its just a question id like answered.

Stern, great point. I've been wondering the same thing.

Are the toyota plants union shops?

Can we have a Toyota vs. Harley thread?

at least when toyota advertises a 1/2 ton pickup, you know you're getting a 1 ton(2000 lb.) payload capacity. with chevy and ford a 1/2 ton means just that; a 1/2 ton.......angelis

Twenty some years ago Toyota and Chevy had a joint venture in California. They built identical cars on the same assembly line of identical components. The only difference was the name plates and decals. Consumer Reports rated the Toyota as high quality and the Chevy as a POS based mostly on what the owners reported. GM & Toyota still do the same thing and the Toyotas still get higher quality ratings.

Ford F-150 Regular Cab, Long Box Cargo Capacity 1920 lbs to 3060 lbs.

(The Harley truck is 1520 lbs. )

http://www.fordvehicles.com/trucks/f150/features/specs/

Chevy 1500 Regular Cab, Long Box Cargo Capacity 1812 lbs

http://www.chevrolet.com/comparator/replaceVehicle.do


Toyota Tundra Regular Cab, Long Box Capacity 1590 Lbs to 2065 lbs

http://www.toyota.com/tundra/specs.html

Ford and Chevy also make 3/4 and 1 ton pickups. Toyota does not.

I'm not a fan of Toyota. They may be well made, but they are completely soul-less to drive.

As for the American cars, the quality is much better than reported, They fill out the top 10 in quality with regularity, right with Honda and Toyota. The perception being poor is fed by the lame brain press.

Thats a great story

I have a Camry made in America. I prefer that to a Chevy made in Mexico. I prefer to support my national economy while buying a very well built vehicle made in this country.

The big 3 pushed hard for NAFTA so they could flee to cheap labor, enabling them to get even bigger bonuses. Well, they got what they wanted. Now they can't explain how Toyota and Honda can make money in America with the same workers.

Shame on them for their greed.

Henery, I don't see hardly any reports any more about how bad American cars are in the press, compared to maybe 5-10 years ago, and I don't think there is nearly the perception anymore that American cars are junk. Yes, there are the occasional lemons, but that is not the problem. The problem is that managers and CEO's have no clue how to manage their companies (I say this having come from the 2nd largest automotive supplier in the world, and being a Tier 1 supplier to all of the automotive companies, both American and Japanese, in the US) US companies continue focusing on trying to emulate Toyota, but in a completely superficial way! Even my former company was doing it, although it was a German company. They roll out this "Toyota Production System" which is supposed to embrace all of the great things Toyota does in their factories (which they do here with American workers just like in Japan), with signs, posters, propaganda, speeches by upper level managers, but when it really comes down to it, it's all talk. When you say, I need this and this and this in order to make our system more lean, you get, "that's not in line with our goals, or that costs too much money", and then proceed to spend twice that for a consultant to come in and give a load of bogus advice and leave.
The Big (or not so big anymore) 3 say they cannot make cars here (or parts) any more because of overhead (labor), yet EVERY Japanese company came here and has succeeded quite well with American workers. And some do it WITH Unions, and some without, so that means, it's not entirely the fault of the Unions (and I'm no fan of Unions). And the working conditions are as good as at any American-run company, in fact FAR better than the conditions at a Ford Plant in Mexico! I bet you would be hard pressed to find someone who would willingly leave Toyota or Honda. SO, if foreign companies can come here and run their business successfully, with great benefits, salaries, and even unions, AND American cars are now perceived as having much better quality on par with Honda or Toyota, how can the Big 3 be doing so miserably?

The perception is the reality. The press has knocked the American brands for so long, that reality has taken.

As for imitating the Asian brands, the culture difference is immense, whereas the Japanese rebuilt from ground up, the American brands dont know how to overcome the disaster that is the union/healthcare/retiremnet plan morass they are in. Management isnt the most innovative, yet lack of funds and political gamesmanship really screw up change, plus, you add it oversized bureacracy, and change isnt easy, if at all possible ( just look at govts ). Start fresh with new contracts and plants and all, then the competitive aspects of the Big 3 would be much different.

I expect Chrysler to repudiate their contracts and much of their retirement obligations, via bankruptcy if necessary. Ford and GM will follow suit. Expensive union contracts and work rules, coupled with short sighted management and fifty years of kicking the can down the road rather than dealing with problems are causing a crisis. The American auto industry will either change or become a mere shadow of its former, and current, self.

Airlines have, and are, going through it now. Some of the big name high cost airlines are long gone. Others are teetering on the brink. All those high paying jobs and cushy work rules drive up prices and make them less competitive. When management then shows all the flexibility, nimbleness and creativity of the California DMV it’s just a matter of time until they are all on the street.

I would agree, except for a couple points. True, the factories were built from the ground up, in Japan, and here, BUT the workforce that was used in the US was not imported from Japan, with the exception of trainers and key personnel until a culture could be built here in the transplant factories. But the majority of the workforce and supervisors, even in the early days, were Americans, both Union and non-Union. Even when one of the Big 3 starts a new plant here in the US, the success rate is much lower, and I think this points back to a cultural issue in the hierarchy of the 3 companies. You alluded to political gamesmanship and the much-touted problems with unions, healthcare, etc..., but all of the Japanese companies have found a way to deal with such issues. These companies are famous for providing birth to grave benefits for employees, and while that system has struggled in recent decades with increased competition and financial instability, companies like Honda and Toyota seem to continue to thrive. I suspect that a LOT of the problem is in the management culture, which changes very little with the exception of shuffling of executives, and the penchant for focusing almost solely on short term goals instead of the long-term stability and welfare of the company. This, from what I have seen in the last 12 years, is a shortcoming of American management style. There is more of a focus on short-term profitability and keeping stockholders happy this quarter and the next, than there is in the true stability and solidity of the company (which provides more benefits in the long term).
Volkswagen ran into this kind of mindset a few years ago, when they were flush with profits because of the success of the new Passat and New Beetle, yet were paying minimal dividends on Wall St. This angered a lot of investors, but the VW philosophy was one of investing in a long-term upgrading and improvement of the company, and it's infrastructure, rather than kow-towing (sp?) to Wall Street.
As to the internal politics, this continues to be a problem, in which executives try to carve out their own little empires, at the expense of the company. I see a lot of this now that I'm working for an American company, although it was also present in the German company I was at. I suspect that such politics are much-less tolerated at companies like Toyota, where the expectation is that everyone works toward the long-term health of the company, and in return, the company looks out for the long-term welfare of its' employees (yep, break the sheet music for "Internationale"!)
Am I pro-Japanese, nope. Don't own any Japanese cars (I prefer the joy and pain of German cars), but I have to admire their business sense. Unfortunately, in our current mindset and culture of outsourcing our manufacturing base out to China and Mexico, I see a dim future for the Big 3, and many other major US manufacturers (this again points back to a focus on short-term gains over long-term health) And, since our Government is now 100% on board with bleeding our economy dry and sending our jobs to China (in return for what benefits I wonder!)...

Big companies in Japan offer lifetime employment because they stay lean. They outsource almost everything, unlike the big 3 auto companies in the US. Rather than layoffs they simply buy less from their suppliers, forcing THEM to do the layoffs. The suppliers pay lower wages and most certainly do not offer lifetime employment. If a supplier pays his workers a little more or offers better benefits that force prices up a bit Toyota, Honda and the others just get a new supplier and the entire company goes belly up.


If the US automakers really want to emulate the Japanese they would outsource 90% of the actual manufacturing, stick to assembly, and let the suppliers deal with the layoffs and pay their workers squat.

A Ford plant I am very familiar with outsources it seats to another local manufacturer. They have to be a union shop in order to get the contract. A little side step came by way of a second outsource company that was not UAW, supplying the first. Local union reps found the loophole and shut it down. I hear this happens quite often with many suppliers.

Not sure where your info comes from Larry, but this is NOT the relationship that I ever experienced in dealing with Toyota, Honda or Subaru. Yes, they outsource a majority of parts, BUT not to the lowest cost (i.e. Mexico or China) supplier, but also take quality into consideration. During my time in my last job, the ONLY pressure we received to send our manufacturing to Mexico came from FORD and GM, NEVER from Toyota or Honda. In fact, when we announced to our suppliers that we were sending our manufacturing to Mexico, Toyota requested that we keep our manufacturing (with regard to their specific product) here in the US. And yes, they do push Lean, but not the way the GM or FORD does. They don't simply just cut orders to their suppliers and drive them out of business, but will actually send their people into a suppliers plant to work together with them to get their processes and suppliers lean as well. It's not simply a matter of shut off supplies when you don't need parts, but rather developing your supply structure to run much more efficiently and to only build the parts you need when you need them. It's called Just-in-time. The only people it ends up hurting are the people in your warehouse department, since there is little or no inventory of incoming or outgoing parts. I've experienced it firsthand, and "cumbaya" as it sounds, it works, WHEN and IF it is implemented right. I have also seen the Ford version, in which orders are built up and built up, and then slashed without warning for weeks at a time, causing us to use temporaries, or to lay off and then try and rehire, permanent employees. And as far the "low wages", I can give you the name and address of a former co-worker of mine who came to us from Honda, feel free to ask him about his time in the "Honda Sweatshop" in Ohio! He actually spoke VERY highly of his time at Honda, as did numerous people I dealt with at Mistubishi (once Chrysler was gone) in Normal, IL.

And I did allude to the fact that Japanese companies are struggling with or in some cases abandoning the lifetime employment model, but loyalty to employees and vice versa is still leaps and bounds above the situation here.

¿Usted habla Larry español?

Good story but sad. I still buy American vehicles whenever I can. My next new vehicle will be a Ford Escape Hybrid 34mpg.vs around 20-28 for a Honda CRV. That's one place the Japanese have not beat the Americans. Ford has the only Hybrid SUV, but I'm sure that will change in the near future. What I can't figure is people still buying 10 mpg Hummers, Excursions, Escalades and Landcruisers with gas at $3.00 per gallon???

That is how they operate in Japan. Much of the actual manufacturing goes to suppliers in Japan who do not operate the same way the named manufacturers do. They did that is a really big way before the US companies did. There are lots of Japanese auto workers not covered by the policies the big Japanese companies use for their own employees. Like here in the US, the workers at the component suppliers are second class and lower paid compared to the workers at the manufacturers own plants.

I agree that the Japanese companies tend to be a lot less penny wise and pound foolish with regard to their policies. I think that stems from them having a different time horizon. Managers and investors here look at quarterly and yearly returns and compensate executives according to very short term measurements. Japanese executives apparently are judged on a much longer term basis.

I get much of my information from a retired auto executive who was an instructor of mine in grad school and with whom I’ve kept in touch. He was the head of Rochester Carburetors (GM) for some time and has been a critic of American automotive management techniques for years. He studied the Japanese automakers back in the 70’s and 80’s by going there for a year or two and reported his findings to the big three. I haven’t spoken to him for a year or so but he was still watching the international auto industry closely despite being retired.

It would be interesting to see how things changed here if executives were held to similar stadards as those overseas, and if we stopped seeing CEO's and upper echelon managers walking out with ridiculous packages despite the obvious poor health of the companies they are leaving!

As for the lower wages, well, maybe the guys in Michigan making $28 an hour to put 3 screws into a trim piece SHOULDN'T be making that. I would hardly have called my wages or benefits(or those of the hourlies I worked with back in South Carolina, where it was completely anti-Union) "lower class", and was actually better off down there than I am up here where Unions prevail in most larger shops. And, as for suppliers employees making less than at the auto plants, well that is pretty much across the board for any auto company that I have dealt with, although moreso with the Big 3. After all, why put up with labor hassles that negotiating lower wages would cause when you can just push your problems off on your suppliers (thus forcing them to go to Mexico or China). Sorry, but the Big 3 have no one to blame but themselves for their predicament. They refuse to implement meaningful changes in their structures, and well, as for trying to recover from a history of poor quality, there is an old saying:
"You've made your bed, now lie in it". Having owned some examples of Detroit quality back in the bad old days, and one Honda during the same time frame, I have very little sympathy for Detroit. Mismanage your business and pay lip service to quality, and you sew very bitter fruit. I think the reputation of American cars is now much better now, and has almost fully recovered from the late 70's and early 80's, and they now have some very nice designs out (heck even Toyota finally woke up and hired some stylists!!), but I still don't see any fundamental changes in how they run the business. Until they develop an understanding of the soundness of planning longterm, and stop thinking only in quarterly windows of time, the mistakes will continue. Of course, it also wouldn't hurt if our elected leaders weren't trying to auction off the United States to Beijing, but that's another argument for another day...

Say! How was everybody's Father's Day yesterday, anyway???

(aren't you proud of me, Phil???!!!...yes, I've decided to join the ranks of the truly "non-committed" around here too...."committed" being the operative word here of course)

A couple of things that have not been mentioned thus far. One the American Auto manufacturers have a much higher cost due to health care. Not because they spend more on the current work force (which they probably do), but due to all the retired workers, which most of the foreign manufacturers do not have yet. Second the cost of the retirement pension is much higher for the American manufacturers again because the foreign companies have very few retired American workers. Now in maybe 20 or so years this will change but for now both issues make it easier for the foreign companies to make a profit when their overhead is much lower, before even building a single car.

Tom

Tom, I will wager that these foreign manufacturers will have less of a problem with this, even into the future, simply due to the difference in culture I have mentioned before. Foreign companies tend to invest more into themselves and look toward longterm issues and growth, than is typical (I say typical, because there are very good American companies out there that don't follow the norm) with older American companies. I won't say all of the problems of the Big 3 could have been avoided with regard to their current retirees, but suspect that many good opportunities for long-term investment (to offset these costs) were squandered away by the short-sightedness of managers trying to make their quarterly returns look better. Also, the assumption that it's more expensive to care for American employees is not entirely true. Granted, countries like Japan have better-developed social welfare systems to help with the costs of caring for the elderly, which helps offset the burden on a company, BUT, the requirements put on companies to plan for the long-term (and short-term) welfare of their employees is VERY high in the more modernized countries like Japan or in Europe. I've had discussions about labor issues with coworkers in Germany, and the hurdles required to dump a bad employee over there sound just as bad as over here in any unionized shop. The main Japanese players have been producing cars since almost the very end of World War 2, and so have to deal just as we do with aging employees and retirees, just seems they have planned for it better.

As my legal battle with GM over my POS Trailblazer is pending, I shall remain silent on this subject.

(I'll pass on the "cat thing", dude....don't want to start anything betwix and between the Dog and the Cat people around here, ya know...I hope you realize how ugly THAT can get)

But, not even a few minutes out on the bike???

You poor devil.

Not to rub it in(much), but I must'a put at least 40 miles on the BA yesterday. I rode to this old motorcycle shop I've been doing business with for many many years(bought a brand new '71 BSA RocketIII from them) which has thrown an annual Fathers Day bash(FREE FOOD and live music...Dick Dale style surf music this year) for many many years.

Talked to many of the same old faces I've known for years, but only seem to have the opportunity to talk to at bashes like this.

Good Time.

(oh....so this won't be consided "off-topic"...a few people showed up not riding M/Cs(BOOOOOO!), but drove up in their Chevys[a G.M. product of course] and Toyotas....deserving of ANOTHER rousing BOOOOOO, of course)

Sounds nice, Bill.

(tell me....Was that little japanese dude who prepared your fish a member of Local 138 Ginsu Knife Cutters Union or not???)

The way he was wielding these:



I assumed so .

He looked kinda like an angry Yoshio Tsuchiya, so I just watched him do his thing .

Yoshio Tsuchiya??? Wasn't he the silent but deadly one(oh geez!!! Here comes the you-know-what jokes now, dude!!!) in Kurosawa's "Seven Samurai"???

(Charles Bronson played the same character in the 1960 Hollywood version, RIGHT?!)

You're thinking of Yoshio Inaba.
Tsuchiya was the young farmer in the same movie.