The Strategic Mistake Which Put Toyota In Its Present Position - Fidelity vs. Convenience

That's a great and insightful article. I found this statement compelling: "Once you wound a carefully built image of fidelity, healing it can be very difficult." That statement also defines one aspect of my choice as a consumer to purchase a Toyota product.

Second, Toyota is both Lexus and Toyota (and now Scion). Some might argue that Lexus represents Toyota's high-fidelity branding. I personally disagree. I believe Lexus is Toyota's ultra-high-fidelity offering and that Toyota itself is (well, was) grounded in its reputation for quailty, precision and excellence -- high-fidelity.

In the 1990s I witnessed a decline in Toyota's product lines. They jettisoned some of their marquee models, like the Supra, and stylistically the trucks were plain and uninspiring. I also noticed the tendency to move from a consumer focus to a big-business model which tried to sell the convenient, mass market vehicle packages as opposed to what autophiles demanded. In the past few years, though, in the 2000s, I thought again that Toyota had marshalled a renewed focus on design and excellence.

I think that they have moved forward with their R&D (Prius) and vehicle designs (new Tacomas and Scions), but missed the mark in manufacturing and quality. It's hard to argue those two concepts aren't the essence of a functional auto.

One thing I'd like to see Toyota address, besides of course quality control issues, is giving customer's what they want and not deviating from the formula that propelled them for decades. For instance, if I want a small Japanese truck it's not because I am interested in a meaty V-6 motor, but because I want a small, efficient vehicle with a four-cylinder motor and a stick shift. Try finding that in one of Toyota's option packages. In fact, one can not even find a SR-5 Prerunner now with bucket seats. In the past two years they changed the offerings that drive them to success for decades.

 

One more thing: If I buy a Japanese car, I want it made in Japan. (Priuses are made in Japan!) I have the image of a Japanese craftsman laboring to make the perfect product based on some cultural imperative that drives him mindlessly to perfection. I don't like the image of my Japanese car being a quasi-Japanese vehicle made by a Walmart shopping, Cowboys-watching, Budweiser-drinking, don't-give-a-damn rebel in Texas. Just a personal preference.

 

Agreed. I want my car assembled by a corporation that doesn't tolerate slackers on the assembly line. Historically the Japanese have identified with their employer and have taken pride in doing a good job. Given a choice between a Toyota assembled in Japan or one assembled in the USA I'll wait for the boat.

 

From what I've recently read, that model is changing. Toyota says that they are losing the dedicated-to-Toyota workers that have always gone the extra lengths to ensure quality --- due to the younger generation workers who don't have that blind faith.

As mentioned, I don't see how that can get any better moving production to the states. I think it's clearly evident that in Toyota's quest to be #1 in sales, the through out the very qualities that got them their reputation for quality.

As illustrated in Jim Collins' book, "How the Mighty Fall," Toyota is passing the 4th phase of "grasping for Salvation" and headed into the 5th and final phase, "Capitulation to Irrelevance or Death."

 

I bought the Prius also because it was built in Japan.
And if I wanted crap, I would have bought Fiat or VW. But then my expectations would have been really low and probably I would not have given 27k€ to get the car.
The only thing I hope is that I will not have to do anything on this car in the next 5 years of warranty. And a few years after that. Otherwise I would have bought again a VW Polo and opened a mortgage to pay for the repairs...
That Toyota has been silent too much, reminds me a lot Apple - they do the same. With the difference that if a Mac doesn't work, nothing really serious can happen. Toyota's overconfidence and presumptuousness is what is ruining them - and being too big. Maybe I should have waited another year before buying a new car. But then, only Toyota has the Prius, so far...

 

I have always known the first version of any new product will have problems that will pester early adopters, like our 2010 Prius. For reliability, the best car to buy is the last of a model year because the factory will incorporate every known fix, like our 2003 Prius. But the new technology remains too compelling.

Bob Wilson

 

Nothing racist in that thought....

 

I believe the days of "made in Japan" equalling "absolute quality" are just plain old gone. Many parts for our modern and very sophisticated autos are offered for bid on the world market and low bids win. Unfortunately low bids can be lower quality...corners are cut somewhere be it in materials or quality labor. Our assembly line cars are assembled with "world" parts and most of the problems we are hearing about are parts issues not final assembly. USA labor can and does assemble as well as many other countries (we use the same robots...ie Camry, Avalon, BMW) and supervisors are trained and often shared. Toyota and BMW auto assembly jobs are highly competitive and reasonably good paying thus I suspect motivation to do a great job is not missing here in the USA plants.
Consumers are more demanding and less willing to accept service calls than they were 40 years ago. My early auto purchases were planned around the traditional trips back to the dealer for the usual tweaks. Now I expect quality on delivery and I'll not accept shakes, rattles, and rolls. Toyota's quality history helped create that mindset.
I think my Prius is one of the best examples of quality product and workmanship on the road today. Why then the current uproar. I think Toyota failed to recognize and adapt to the roll instant communication plays in the marketplace today. Sales followups and immediate responses to each customers concerns is a must if Toyota is to regain the upper hand in consumer confidence perceptions and catch the inevitable glitchs. Perhaps the dealerships could be included in the efforts although some of them haven't earned a lot of customer respect. We need someone willing to listen and hear consumer concerns and act on them promptly.
I believe Toyota can do this. I hope they will.

 

Quality is a management issue. If management wants quality, they can make it happen. If they care more about the stock price, or profit margins...

The best example is the difference between a Hyundai Excel and a Hyundai Accent. The former was not a very reliable product, while the latter is rated pretty highly. Was that because South Korean auto workers suddenly became better workers, or was it because Hyundai's management made a commitment to a quality product? I guess the latter.

 

+1. From what I have read, Toyota became obsessed with first passing Ford and then GM. And quality suffered.

How about the auto workers became better workers because Hyundai's management made a commitment to a quality product? You can make a commitment to a quality product, but if you don't invest in the human resource that is charged with making the quality product, the effort is likely to come up a bit on the short side.

 

Nah. Just anti redneck. The world would likely be a better place with a few less rednecks.

 

Absolutely, and that combined with arrogance is not a good combination. Just look at what has happened to GM over the last 30 years, how much evidence do you need about the results of arrogance.

 

Well, Toyota did set a goal of being beating GM an Ford for market share dominance about 10 years back. They seem to have achieved that goal (along with the challenges that go along with the goal).

I wonder if they could have looked 10 years ahead into the future when they were deciding to pass GM and Ford and been able to see the problems they would encounter, whether they would have made the decision to pass GM and Ford?

 

Yes, I think the evidence is growing that toyota thought they were 'different' enough from GM and Ford they would not have the same types of troubles when they were number one. I think the evidence is piling up that they may have thought they were above the law and certainly above tough media scrutiny. I guess they used one too many 'get out of jail free' cards over the last decade.

I have been saying on here for the last 3.5 years that they were living on two things: the laurels and good will built up by some of the past products and the good will and media buzz that came form the success of the Prius. The quality has slipped and other than the Hybrid, there is absolutely nothing sexy or exciting about the product.
They have made some of the same mistakes that GM made: GM created Saturn-disaster, toyota created Scion=disaster, although toyota did not require stand-alone stores. The two largest volume toyota vehicles are the corolla and the camry, both remind me of a 1996 Buick Century.....Like a bowl of mayonaise.

 

And a few less elitists.

 

The author of the "Strategic Mistake" article, Kevin Maney ... must be a genius ... comparing auto manufacturing and brewing coffee. Wow ... talk about your arm chair quarterbacks ... sheez ... now THOSE sure are two identical business models: Coffee, versus thousand of parts ... thousand of machines to make the parts, engineering, R&D. Wow! why didn't I notice that?!? Kind of makes you wonder why he's not out there helping Lutz run GM, since he's got it together so well, on how auto manufacturing goes. Maybe we should all vote him in as the next U.S. president ... being such a great problem solver.



.