In a very well written article for the Sunday, February 18, 2007 issue of the New York Times Magazine, Jon Gertner explores what makes and has made the Toyota Motor Company the premier automobile manufacturing company. It is his contention that Toyota is not only the "best auto maker in the world, but also maybe the best corporation".

He cites many things that have contributed to Toyota's rise, among them it's focus on quality, it's persistance in the market and it's long term vision. But, the thing that I found striking was Toyota's focus on the process as well as the product. Its not enough to make and constantly improve a great product, a company has to constantly improve the process for making its products as well. Increases in productivity shouldn't only be for the benefit of profit, but should also be put back into the product so that the company can give more product for the same cost. For example, Mr. Gertner suggests that an increase in the productivity of the Camry was put right back into the car in terms of an upgraded dashboard at no additional cost to the consumer. The focus on the process made the product better.

There are many lessons to be learned from Toyota. The article is very good and well worth reading.
http://select.nytimes.com/search/restricte...DAB0894DF404482


The process is as important as the product.

 

I was introduced to the quality of Japanese cars with a light blue 1973 Toyota Corona MkII. When first produced in

 

And the Camero around the corner (just straight behind your car)......

 

I agree with the article. The only reason I drive a Honda is because Toyota doesn't make sport cars anymore. They're too busy making unprecedented 8 speed cars and in a constant pursuit of perfection. They

 

That might have been my old one. I had a '68.

 

having spent some time looking at development cycles there are some interesting attributes to this type of process.
It is highly optimized towards 'refining' a product, polishing the stone if you will.
It is not well suited towards breakthrough engineering however. Management needs to be very attuned towards developing a rut. otherwise their products while very good in the long term loose character. the lexus while very refined, just doesn't have that edge which provides driver satisfaction. I suppose it will last a long time but then again it will still be as boring and unsatisfying at 200K miles as it was new.

I have to say honda on the other hand seems to be perpetually looking for the edge.

 

That is very true, and even the article says that Honda is more innovative, and more often the winner of accolades from magazines. Still, Toyota does seem to understand the markets that they choose to compete in, and they manage to dominate any market they enter.

Still, what you say is very true, and there is always the possiblity that Toyota will become the General Motors of the future. Market domination does tend to make companies complacent. That said, I think that right now it is the premier corporation in the world.

 

[QUOTE=ralper,Feb 26 2007, 06:10 AM] He cites many things that have contributed to Toyota's rise, among them it's focus on quality, it's persistance in the market and it's long term vision.

 

Apparently the New York Times felt it newsworthy enough to run it as the feature article in the February 18, 2007 magazine.

What I find striking about your comment is that even though much of the theory has been around since the 1980s, and even before, much of American industry, and most of America didn't discover it until recently. In fact, some still haven't.

 

Yes, so?

I appreciate that not everybody has spent the last 20 years getting "process control and improvement" drilled into them, but in no way, shape, or form is it news that Toyota is big on this.

Maybe that's why this was in the "magazine" section of the paper.

And (collectively, anyway), you are definitely selling short US manufacturing companies. There are some that don't get it, but many more who do.