http://www.autoblog.com/2007/02/28/a...g-with-toyota/

 

Told ya he's smart...

 

this could be a smart move or it could be a disaster.....all depends on what they mean by 'technology sharing'.

 

I think to get a sense of what Mulally has planned for Ford, you need only look to what he did with Boeing. Guys like this tend to follow the same M.O.

Boeing was losing a pitched battle against Airbus (a company that enjoys EU subsidies) and kept re-hashing the same old jetliners with slight modifications; referring to them as the "new and improved" version (sound familiar?). Boeing are now doing much better because under Mulally's stewardship they chose to revolutionize the commercial aircraft industry by introducing planes like the 787. In other words, regain market share by innovating and leading rather than by chasing everyone else and just appearing to be an "also ran."

Now the big question is how will Ford N/A manage to do this, given remarks like the following >>

Given the fact that you just got rid of a third of your engineering assets, and for the last few years when I was in Product Planning the primary reason new products could not make it through was engineering containability, how are you going to proceed with your new product development effort?

I'm sorry, I forgot, silly goose that I am, you still have marketing and finance staffs to engineer new products.

I suspect - and I could be wrong about this - that Mulally's intention is to offset the North American engineering loss by utilizing the company's global assets with a more tightly focused team of international engineers working on some carefully concocted common platforms, whose primary difference will be unique body styles and packaging tailored for each region >> North America, Europe, Australia.

This is born out by the Mustang survey on this board which asks owners and enthusiasts what they want to see in the 2010 Mustang, and specifically asks them how they feel about a Stang that utilizes technology from other divisions - Land Rover, Volvo, Jaguar, Mazda, etc - and parts not necessarily made in the United States.

Clearly, there will still be certain vehicles that will be region-specific, but if you really study the current evidence, I think you can see what the long-term plan is.

Now, how long before we see its implementation? Who knows? There's also the little problem of stripping 'marketing & finance' of their "engineering" duties.

 

Yeah, judging by his firing/buyout pattern and the survey, it appears he's putting Ford's engineering into the hands of Mazda, Volvo, and Ford EU/Aus. Can't say I blame him: Ford NA had plenty of time to show it was up to the task and dissapointed every time. Ford Trucks, on the other hand, will likely still be engineered stateside.

 

I see your point but I don't go along with this mindset. This kind of approach almost makes it sound as though Ford NA is more like a contractor to Ford Corporate, and that if they don't do the job Ford will go with another supplier.

It is more accurate and beneficial IMO to view this as the manager/employee relationship that it truly is. And it would be more helpful given this for Mulally to simply start saying that his underlings will either do what they are told, when they are told to, and how they are told to do it or he'll fire their useless rumps and replace them with people who will do so.

I can tell you from personal experience you don't have to cull too much of the chattle for this to be a very effective motivating force. And eventually you get what you want in both scenarios, either through an attitude change or through replacement. And honestly, I don't trust any manager at any level that makes it more difficult than this.