4 ms·
I do not see why you must lower the build quality in order to lower the cost. Yes, lowering the build quality saves money in the short-term, but there are othe
by wensing 18y ago
I do not see why you must lower the build quality in order to lower the cost. Yes, lowering the build quality saves money in the short-term, but there are other ways to save money, no? As they're learning now, going the low quality route is actually very expensive (unprofitable) in the long-term.
Have you compared the big three and their Japanese rivals in terms of their manufacturing process?
- mattmaroon 18y agoNo, but even if that's true, is it really fair or, in the long term, sustainable, to give the Japanese a $2,000 head start? You're requiring our companies to innovate away $2,000 worth of overhead just to achieve parity. Even if they accomplish that, the Japanese are just as bright as us and they'll do it right back. And The Toyota Way was published 5 years ago and was a snapshot of the industry years before that. I promise you people at GM have read it too. I wouldn't deny that Toyota has probably done better until more recently, and that their actions therefore gave them more than the $2,000 edge. But $2,000 is more than enough to win. I'm not trying to suggest that that $2,000 is the only problem, just that it's one that is insurmountable, and therefore needs to be fixed.