BlueOvalBlogs: A poor workman blames his tools

[Blue Oval Staff]

I would like to see Ford get serious not about manufacturing, not about advertising, not about anything that you can see, I want Ford serious about something you’ll never see unless you work for Ford. I want Ford serious about overhauling the way they DESIGN vehicles.

 

It’s not the fault of the workers, the ‘tools’ Ford Motor Company uses to build cars here. It’s the fault of the system under which they’re used.

.

READ MORE HERE

[retro-man]

Good one Richard. I may not always agree with you about what I'd like to see coming out of the process, but I do agree that, with a few exceptions like Mustang, it is not working too well.

[Mark B. Morrow]

I remember the stories about the development of the Taurus back in the 1980's that referenced how Ford purchased competitor's vehicles and tore them down to "reverse engineer" the components and process of construction. It was an abandonment of the old way of ignoring anything "not invented here".

 

You don't here much about benchmarking anymore. If Ford has discontinued this practice, it should be reinstated immediately. I can't help but think what could be learned from disassembling a few Lexus or Hyundai models and carefully examining the materials and design. The Taurus experiance proved the worth of this exercise. The Taurus was completely removed in style, feel and construction from the LTD/Marquis that preceded it.

[ford-boy]

I hope those that can cause change and actually steer the ship, read your article Richard. In some parts of the company, there has always been a reluctance to embrace the notion that time and technology and the market move on. You need to move with it. Things within Ford move like the plate tectonics of earthquakes. As years go by, more and more pressure is built up until --- boom. Big change occurs, new designs are set free and sales go up for a while. Then the process continues until the next great pressure causes a quake. Its amazing how much of Henry's personality STILL exists within their walls. If he were still running the company, tractors would still be using the flathead. I don't think there was ever a time of greater pressure than now and I hope Ford rises to the occasion. Boy, when they are REALLY set free, they can rise to enormous heights. I so hope this is one of those times.

[RichardJensen]

Its amazing how much of Henry's personality STILL exists within their walls.

I agree.

 

The company's culture has been handed down 'father to son' almost as much as the company itself has been handed down.

 

Now is the time to make a clean break.

[Deanh]

agreed wholeheartedley, the father to son comment is on the money, I assume THAT is partly responsible for the consistent "dumbing" down of knockout concept cars to the bland production models...unfortunately those in the decision making positions have become WAY too removed from the desires of the people with the checkbooks....

[sparks will fly]

Because people are machines. They are machines that are expensive to operate, they have less ‘uptime’, and their output is less predictable than the automated metal on the line with them.

 

Well this is a double edge sword here RJ. You see that in order to improve the uptime automation it must be a quality machine and well taken care of, like the cars you and I buy. If it is treated poorly and not given the proper care ( PM's, cleaning, properly fixed not programmed around the problem) then it will cause MORE downtime than it should. This downtime costs Ford thousands of dollars per minute when the line is not moving, jobs going off the end of the line, and the humans sitting waiting for the next job, you get the idea. Do you see where I am going with this? In the 14 years with Ford we have gone BACKWARDS in this process. We do less to fix the equipment and have less to fix it with. Why because of FPS, lean manufactring, and the lack of skilled managers in maintanence. So when they do right the ship with design and get up to speed with making winners again this will be something they will have to tackle in order to make it. To run a plant like a first class operation you MUST spend money to take care of it.

[Bluecon]

That is quite an abrupt U turn by RJ.

Suddenly he sounds like Bluecon.

Perhaps some of Fords problems are Bill jrs and managements fault?

Edited November 15, 2006 by Bluecon

[RichardJensen]

That is quite an abrupt U turn by RJ.

Suddenly he sounds like Bluecon.

Perhaps some of Fords problems are Bill jrs and managements fault?

No. Never have I said that Ford's product design process is perfect, or anywhere close to perfect. They have made strides, but they have a long way to go.

 

I am tired of seeing people blame Detroit problems on the UAW.

[kyle]

No. Never have I said that Ford's product design process is perfect, or anywhere close to perfect. They have made strides, but they have a long way to go.

 

I am tired of seeing people blame Detroit problems on the UAW.

 

nice article richard....and I agree it not the UAW's fault but management. It is not like they put a gun to the guys head and had him sign or offer him a contract.

 

You watch what happens this next go around....if you don't think there is going to be some serious come to jesus sessions your crazy. Ford is staring bankrupty in the face if they do not get things turned around quick.

 

I happened to like bill ford....I just don't think he had the experience to do what he needed to do. The best thing he has done since he has been there is hire mulally-a complete outsider to the industry.

 

And unlike some of you I happen to like ghossen-he is a take no prisoner's kind of guy as well.

[RichardJensen]

It is not like they put a gun to the guys head and had him sign or offer him a contract.

Well, the UAW did kind of hold a gun on the Big Three.

 

My point is that all of that is completely immaterial. Ford has sufficient cash flow to out-invest every single car maker out there, and they do so on an annual basis.

 

As long as Ford is spending $7B on product development, they should be outperforming everyone in the industry. They have come a long way from where they were in 2000/2001, but they are by no means where they need to be.

 

This is a snippet of one of W. Edwards Deming's 14 points:

 

"the bulk of the causes of low quality and low productivity belong to the system and thus lie beyond the power of the work force"

 

Blaming the employees in the system, or their pay, does nothing to address the dominant cause of uncompetitive product.

[06StangAwesomecar]

Excellent post, to bad the UAW haters cant see that.

[g48150]

No. Never have I said that Ford's product design process is perfect, or anywhere close to perfect. They have made strides, but they have a long way to go.

 

I am tired of seeing people blame Detroit problems on the UAW.

 

Like GPDS, I used to come in here and post that it sucks, you agree now?

 

Hypocrite...

[RichardJensen]

Like GPDS, I used to come in here and post that it sucks, you agree now?

 

Hypocrite...

GPDS is better than NOTHING, which is what Ford had before. Therefore I am not going to say it sucks. NOTHING sucks. GPDS is somewhere between NOTHING and what they really need.

 

You are an absolutist, and a rejectionist.

 

That's the difference between your take on GPDS and mine.

[jafo]

RichardJensen makes some good points. UAW cannot be blamed for marketing and engineering mistakes, however UAW is not blame free. The biggest problem that the big 3 have with UAW is the GEN pool. While it protects workers, it also holds down productivity and quality.

 

Let me explain why this is the case. From an industrial engineering point of a view, car assembly can be more than 90% automated. Automation brings high productivity and high quality to manufacturing. The more automated a process is, the better quality and consistency can be controlled. The gen pool reduces investment in more automation as there is no need to automate a process if there is little payoff for doing so. This means that processes can be automated, but they still have to pay someone to do nothing in the gen pool that used to manually do those process.

 

In short the gen pool needs to be killed or radically altered with the next contract. It takes far fewer workers to assemble cars than it used to and the big 3 needs to be able to easily adjust their workforce to reflect todays much more automated reality.

[DearbornDerek]

True it does take fewer workers but......I would really like to see anyone try and make the process 90% automated. It can not be done...and I don't mean because of the UAW.

[grbeck]

This article is a good rejoinder to those who believe that eliminating the UAW will solve most of Ford's (and GM's) problems.

 

But the UAW isn't completely blameless here.

 

I agree that the UAW can't be blamed for engineering or product planning mistakes. It isn't the UAW's fault that GM produced the Aztek, that Ford let the Focus go for too long without a revamp, or that GM killed Oldsmobile.

 

But there is a deeper problem occurring here. Unfortunately, over the years Ford and GM have treated manufacturing as the red-headed stepchild. In the excellent book The Reckoning, one consistent theme is the disconnect between Fords' top management (heavily dominated by Finance people) and those who manage the factories. Top management views the factories almost with disdain. While this attitude has improved over the past few years (by necessity - the company really does have to either change or die), the disconnect hasn't been completely eliminated. And the UAW has been happy to exploit that neglect.

 

Toyota and Honda take production more seriously, and thus their factories are better managed than those of Ford and GM. That also means that their workers take production more seriously. Meanwhile, the UAW has exploited management's lackadaisical attitude.

 

How many UAW workers have complained on this very site about the union's refusal to discipline slackers or those who exploit sick leave?

 

The absentee rate in transplant operations is about 2 percent on any given day. At Ford and GM, it is well over 10 percent. That translates into hundreds of millions of dollars annually in extra expense for GM and Ford. The UAW is partly responsible for that handicap.

 

A factory run without proper discipline will eliminate the advantages brought about by using the best-engineered components and finest materials.

 

The Big Two can be compared to a sports league where management didn't want to invest much in facilities, because they were only playing themselves. The players were well paid, but they regularly skipped training and didn't bother with nutrition. This was all fine, until a new team came into town, with managers who are willing to invest in facilities, and expect the players to practice hard and play hard. Now the game just got a whole lot tougher, and the old teams need to shape up to stay in the running. And that requires a new attitude from both management and the players.

[jafo]

True it does take fewer workers but......I would really like to see anyone try and make the process 90% automated. It can not be done...and I don't mean because of the UAW.

 

 

Greater than 90% is possible and if memory serves me correctly toyota is fairly close to this at their japanese plants.

[jafo]

I refuse to believe it. Body build maybe, but trim? No way. If you ever come up with any proof, post it.

 

 

Got a friend that is an industrial engineer that told me this a couple of years ago. I will see if he will pass source the source to me. But realistically, robotics and electronics are getting cheaper and more capable.

[RichardJensen]

the UAW isn't completely blameless here.

I agree. But the lion's share of the blame rests with management, and always has.

 

Legacy costs, healthcare costs, and high labor costs (high pay and high absenteeism) hasn't kept Ford from out investing Toyota year in and year out.

 

With that in mind, there is simply no reason to blame line workers, or customers, for Ford's planning predicament.

 

They let their whole system collapse before taking any kind of restructuring seriously. Bill Ford may not have been equipped to steer the company through a turnaround, but Jac Nasser was the guy at the helm that should've known better. He was informed in '97 that Ford's product planning was screwed, and he did nothing.

[jafo]

I agree. But the lion's share of the blame rests with management, and always has.

 

Legacy costs, healthcare costs, and high labor costs (high pay and high absenteeism) hasn't kept Ford from out investing Toyota year in and year out.

 

With that in mind, there is simply no reason to blame line workers, or customers, for Ford's planning predicament.

 

They let their whole system collapse before taking any kind of restructuring seriously. Bill Ford may not have been equipped to steer the company through a turnaround, but Jac Nasser was the guy at the helm that should've known better. He was informed in '97 that Ford's product planning was screwed, and he did nothing.

 

I dont disagree with this. Ford along with the other big 2, have lacked the flexible manufacturing that other companies had. So when gas went up and SUV sales fell, it hurt. Ford does seem to be making some strides with improved manufacturing and a better product line. Product line problems can never be blamed UAW. However if you UAW were to resist improved manufacturing process because it would cost jobs, they would be to blame for decreased quality and higher costs. UAW only seems to be interested in protecting jobs(as in headcount), which is only driving headcount as the big three try to compete with much leaner companies.

[RichardJensen]

The problems with Ford are even further up the pipeline than flexible manufacturing. Their product design and development systems were hopeless. They are getting better, but are still far from being competitive.