Reply to: Toyota

[minestrone]

I'll bet you're happy using past tense...

They were kind of harmless idiots who used to talk a lot about how energy mum was a state of mind.

In a kind of Andy Dufresne way they are going to come out of this pipe smelling clean, they never thought of themselves as a quality brand, the lengths they would go to distance themselves from Lexus were quite astounding, Toyota was for the masses and Lexus was a quality car according to them and naming to two brands together was completely banned.

Now with the problems have happened they are coming out with the line 'ohh, these minor defects have tarnished the excellent name of toyota and its quality that we have worked so hard to get'. People are now thinking they were a quality brand, fantastic marketing and as this thread proves one that is working.

In ten years they have went from press releases that state that they do not sell directly to the Taliban to one where they claim that they are going to be the best manufacturer of cars again. Genius.

Japanese marketing is better than their manufacturing as my heap of old Sony products proves.

[cojak]

I used to work for Toyota marketing.

I'll bet you're happy using past tense...

[minestrone]

I used to work for Toyota marketing.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

Remember the Ford Pinto.

Great until you got rear ended & turned to toast.

If you read up on that properly, you'll find it was a typical example of the lawyers enriching themselves without any benefit to anyone else, and that car was not significantly worse than any other.

The main cause of these scares is the fact that the USA has such a high proportion of exceptionally stupid and useless *drivers. Remember Audi and Volvo havong all those "problems" with their auto cars "running away" with the drivers unexpectedly? You have the septics to thank for all the daft interlocks now fitted - foot on brake before you can shift an auto out of park etc - and hey presto all those mysterious incidents ended.

* and often drunk and not wearing a seatbelt

[Clippy]

<truther>Car companies have recalls all the time. This one has been blown out of proportion by the US govt. controlled media to try and improve the competitiveness of the state car manufacturer General Motors.</truther>

I think there is an element of truth in this with respect to how this has been hyped up by the US media.

However, Toyota haven't helped themselves with very poor communication to consumers and the media which I suspect is partly due to the corporate (Japanese) culture and also because they had multiple issues across models and were not sure themselves of exactly what was going on.

Anyway, don't large corporates factor in lawsuit costs if their products lead to consumer deaths. The calculations favour paying for potential lawsuits as opposed to product recalls. However, this is a potentially massive product recall which probably makes any such calculation redundant.

Remember the Ford/Firestone tyre recall? Both brands survived that intact.

[Jeebo72]

Great post old bean.

A Quality Manager in my early career once counciled me as follows:

"A delay in delivery will remain in the mind of the client for roughly the length of the delay. A drop in quality will remain there forever."

Sage advice

Yonk ... very relevant at the mo. I'm going to nick that one!

[Mich the Tester]

This is the same issue that has been going on for about 30 years - shareholders will continue to insisit on an increased return on investment the only way the borad can deliver that (especially in the current econmic climate) is to keep reducing costs and making cost cuts.

But do people invest in a firm like Toyota hoping for short term gains? That would seem strange to me. Surely Toyota would attract conservative investors who want stable long term returns and a share price that can weather the storms of the market?

[Scary]

<truther>Car companies have recalls all the time. This one has been blown out of proportion by the US govt. controlled media to try and improve the competitiveness of the state car manufacturer General Motors.</truther>

[original PM]

It seems to me that some corporate managers failed to understand their responsibilities. A company like Toyota has tens of thousands of employees, millions of customers and millions of direct or indirect (pension investors) shareholders who rely on them to do one thing above all; make and sell good products.

We’ve all seen managers rewarded handsomely for achieving some deadline or meeting a sales target or cutting costs by x. Have we ever seen people being rewarded anything like as handsomely for improving quality, or simply for preventing a mistake that could cost a business hundreds of millions or pounds?

This is the same issue that has been going on for about 30 years - shareholders will continue to insisit on an increased return on investment the only way the borad can deliver that (especially in the current econmic climate) is to keep reducing costs and making cost cuts.

Once you have done the good thing of removing items which add cost but no value they then go on to remove the costs related to actual reuqired tasks and workstreams and the product fails.

Interestingly enough the only people who really loose in this scenario are the customer (obviously) and the loyal worker who has spent years supporting the company only to be sold down the river by weak board members and pushy stakeholders.

But I suppose we all need to understand that companies are here to make money and those who make the decisions have a sole interest in ensuring they are never out of pocket. Regardless of the impact.

[Mich the Tester]

It seems to me that some corporate managers failed to understand their responsibilities. A company like Toyota has tens of thousands of employees, millions of customers and millions of direct or indirect (pension investors) shareholders who rely on them to do one thing above all; make and sell good products.

We’ve all seen managers rewarded handsomely for achieving some deadline or meeting a sales target or cutting costs by x. Have we ever seen people being rewarded anything like as handsomely for improving quality, or simply for preventing a mistake that could cost a business hundreds of millions or pounds?

[Mich the Tester]

I think that it is a short term blip. Medium to long term they should be okay as long as product quality returns to high levels. Toyota is a strong brand

I hope you're right. Mercedes have been through something like this and have come through with a rebuilt reputation. But remember, that was with one model, bottom of the range, completely new, in unusual circumstances and they responded quickly by investing more in solving the problems than they ever expected to make from that model. It seems that Toyota have problems with more than one model and that the management had been warned by techies about safety issues.

[BlackenedBiker]

Good advice indeed.

It looks more and more like this will end in tears for Toyota. US customers are suing them for the extra depreciation as they can’t sell their cars on the second hand market without dropping the price to rock bottom. If they win, then lease companies all over the world might do the same thing. If that happens, Toyota might not survive this. That would be a terrible shame, not least for many thousands of people who conscientiously did their jobs day in day out and thought they were working for a good company.

However, it might serve as a warning for all corporate managers. As the Dutch say, a good reputation comes by foot but leaves on a horse.

I think that it is a short term blip. Medium to long term they should be okay as long as product quality returns to high levels. Toyota is a strong brand

[Mich the Tester]

Great post old bean.

A Quality Manager in my early career once counciled me as follows:

"A delay in delivery will remain in the mind of the client for roughly the length of the delay. A drop in quality will remain there forever."

Sage advice

Good advice indeed.

It looks more and more like this will end in tears for Toyota. US customers are suing them for the extra depreciation as they can’t sell their cars on the second hand market without dropping the price to rock bottom. If they win, then lease companies all over the world might do the same thing. If that happens, Toyota might not survive this. That would be a terrible shame, not least for many thousands of people who conscientiously did their jobs day in day out and thought they were working for a good company.

However, it might serve as a warning for all corporate managers. As the Dutch say, a good reputation comes by foot but leaves on a horse.

[suityou01]

Great post old bean.

A Quality Manager in my early career once counciled me as follows:

"A delay in delivery will remain in the mind of the client for roughly the length of the delay. A drop in quality will remain there forever."

Sage advice

Loving this.

[AtW]

Great post old bean.

A Quality Manager that was made redundant to save costs in my early career once counciled me as follows:

"A delay in delivery will remain in the mind of the client for roughly the length of the delay. A drop in quality will remain there forever."

Sage advice

FTFY