Ford Motor Company Case Study

&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212- &8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212- cover Motor attach to Case Report &8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212- Executive stocky crossroad Motor association has a long history, starting in Michigan in 1903. They keep up focused on designing and manufacturing and dupe been very achieverful, however with increasing competition, global markets and over-capacity the company needs to suppose at ways to change profitability. The company has implemented unhomogeneous programs and puzzle outes to urinate a bunk, responsive carcass with better consumer forecasting.Their challenge is to continue to odor for ways to stay viable in current market and intentness conditions. dell Computers has been very successful with a bespeak representative and virtual(prenominal)(prenominal) integration that whitethorn or non work salubrious for crossroad. confine * ISSUE3 * ANALYSIS4 * ALTERNATIVES6 * RECOMMENDATIONS 7 * IMPLEMENTATION 8 * CONCLUSION8 * REFERENCES9 * ISSUE The hybridisation Motor Company is facing a number of challenges including the shipion of CEO Jac Nasser to focus on client responsiveness and shareholder value to deal with increasing competitiveness, an manufacturing with potential over-capacity and the expansion into globalized markets.Ford had begun to implement arrangings to reduce cycle-time, change quality and to glare costs. Programs allow ind consolidating product development into five Vehicle Centres (VCs), reeingineered mathematical processes such as Order to Delivery (OTD), Fort Production System (FPS) and credit line to communication channel (B2B) capacity. Additionally, culture flow was examined to overcome geographical constraints, thus becoming a critical comp unmatchednt of Fords global approach. During the past hug drug the company has implemented many programs and processes becoming the most improved car work onr with steady upward trending sales and record profit manduction.The bring out train initially had a base of many competitive providers until the 1990s when they began to sustain toward fewer, long term provider relationships. Ford fostered relationships with tier ane providers who would port with tier two and former(a) suppliers. With Fords support, the suppliers tried a variety of strategies including Just-In-Time (JIT) inventory, Total Quality Management (TQM) and Statistical Process pick up (SPC). A limitation emerged in the variance of IT expertness and capability among the bring out orbit members.To reach the goal of reduced cycle time, creating a flex and flexible process, Ford is look intoing dingle Computers successful orient mould to see if this virtual integration system would work for them. The govern model reduces the time and costs of third party distribution finished work out interfa cing with as few partners as possible as a way to improve production and guest responsiveness. The challenge is to determine if this system will work for Ford Motor Company. * ANALYSIS The CEOs influenceive is complicated by various(a) factors.While dingles direct model works for dell, it may or may non be effective with Ford. The company has been by a ten-spot of change and adjustments to various processes and directions and while the option is available, a ending is non urgent as Ford is in a pretty good position. Dells direct model involves a guest focus, small numbers of supplier partnerships, customization, a just-in-time inventory and manufacturing. In order to do this, Dell ties in technology to communicate and coordinate these goals and strategies. They use what they call steep integration.This screwr that they work very closely with customers and suppliers including actually having staff on range running(a) directly with customers and partners, share-out training and knowledge to enable flexibleness and effectiveness reducing cycle times. Dell establishes partnerships or collaborations with their customers and suppliers which is much a wish easily guardled outsourcing. Michael Dell of Dell information processing systems argues that outsourcing is tralatitiously a way to get absolve of a problem. His direct model, in contrast, is partnering with companies who are treated as though they are internal staff.This model improves the level of information sharing and motivation to succeed as a team. Technology heart that the information sharing fecal matter be easily and effectively done in a win-win type of arrangement. The challenge is to maintain these relationships and focus on the undertaking at hand. Providing suppliers with real-time information and up to date demand enables the supplier to act accordingly to meet Dells requirements. Removing multiple layers and work closely with customers and suppliers removes the possibil ity of misinformation, reaction time and ability to not except react, but to determine much accurate forecasts.Dell has been able to streamline their customer response times by helping the customer decide what they need. They make it easier for the customer to make the purposes and are ultimately preparing for it while the conversation is happening. Dell acts as a consultant and trainer getting direct feedback and learnstone information for planning, research and development. They let in key people from a enormous range of responsibilities in regular meetings to ensure communication, ideas and overall commitment from the blameless supply chain. Virtual integration goes even further to merge the tralatitious roles and boundaries of the supply chain.Dell argues that the direct model and virtual integration is beneficial to the customer from distribution to manufacturing and design. This model works for Dell, but whether it would work for Ford is the question. Ford has already reduced its supply chain base by dealing with Tier one suppliers to use Just-In-Time inventory processes and different strategies to improve commitment and capability. They implemented the Ford Production System (FPS), focusing on key parts of the manufacturing process to improve efficiency. The Synchronous Material tend (SMF) was developed to ensure a continuous flow of materials.This was done by using lean manufacturing c one timepts, careful scheduling and sequenced assembly. Their Order to Delivery (OTD) process was as well developed to streamline the cycle time, reducing the order to talking to from 65 days to as little as 15 days. In order to do this they used forecasting, keeping 15 days of vehicles in the assembly plants order bank, using regional coalesce centers for deliveries and a responsive order amendment process. Last but not least they worked on something called the Ford Retail Network (FRN) to test best practices and to prepare an alternate distribution chann el.The idea was to consolidate Fords efforts to repugn against the competition of other auto makers rather than compete against each other. Because Dell and Ford are such different companies it is difficult to know if just integration would work. Dell is a smaller company whose current success is due to customer focus, pull demand, speed of response and virtual integration. In contrast, Ford is a much larger company with a mingled and long-standing system of supply chain leadership where purchasing was historically intemperately involved in the various activities of the company.A move to virtual integration requires that roles swag and responsibilities change to allow great collaboration and information sharing. ALTERNATIVES Differences between the companies include principal networks, product and process conglomerateity, age and size of the company, adept expertise and apply over systems. Ford has a great amount of control, hassle forecasting customer needs, higher pro duct complexity, a strong dealer network and unionized labour. Dell is relatively new, there is high skillful expertise, the product is not as complex, forecasting can be fair accurate and their supplier relationships are good.Ford enjoys a significant amount of control over their supply chain, manufacturing, assembly and distribution, while Dell may not be able to exercise control depending on the relationships built and arrangements made. At this time, Ford does not really need to make a decision to change their business model, but there is a push for great globalization, efficiency and flexibility. They can move toward virtual integration, stay the same, or latch on some kind of balance of the direct model with their current model.Because of their size and established supply chain, a move toward vertical integration and a direct model would mean fairly drastic changes and giving up controls that oblige been care all-inclusivey developed over the past decade. That said, stay ing the same would not be advisable, as the market is increasingly competitive on the topical anesthetic and global stage. Ford will be required to look at further adaptations to their operations in order to stay competitive. RECOMMENDATION It would be advisable for Ford to examine vertical integration in at least some areas of their operations.Because this requires high levels of technology, they can work with Tier one suppliers to develop collaborations and more(prenominal) extensive information sharing. Doing nothing is not ordinarily a feasible option in successful business and bounteous integration would be very difficult to accomplish and my not have the results that Dell has due to the various differences in the companies and their products. IMPLEMENTATION Ford can use focus groups and regular meetings to move toward a direct model in at least some areas of the business.The dealer network may be used as an advantage to forecasting if they work more closely with the devel opment teams, manufacturing and assembly plants. The customer focus groups can commence to develop relationships that help to develop what customers want and might have as potions can be insightful and will improve forecasting. Purchasing, engineering, marketing and other groups can get involved in these focus groups, which may also encourage dialogue and collaboration toward cohesive end results. * CONCLUSIONFord has implemented many strategies successfully and has been forward thinking in their experimental condition of various models and options. Becoming faster may or may not work to their advantage as buying a car is a decision that is weighed carefully and is a bigger investment than choosing a estimator or laptop. The speed at which the company supplies a vehicle at one time ordered is important, but I suggest, not as important as the customer getting the options, financing and service that they see with this type of purchase.That said, customers look for greater custo mization and choice than ever before. Whether Ford takes on this model or chooses to research another model is a step in the adjust direction. give chain management is a large part of how well the company can respond to customer needs and ultimately build profit and ongoing competitive advantage. * REFERENCES Austin, Robert D. , Ford Motor Company add on Chain Strategy, 9-699-198, Harvard Business School Publishing, 1999. Magretta, Joan (2001) The Power of Virtual Integration An question with Michael Dell, Harvard Business ReviewFord Motor Company Case select&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212- &8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212- Ford Motor Company Case Report &8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212- Executive stocky Ford Motor Company has a long history, starting in Michigan in 1903. They have focused on designing and manufacturing and have been very successful, however with increasing competition, global markets and over-capacity the company needs to look at ways to improve profitability. The company has implemented various programs and processes to fix a lean, responsive system with better consumer forecasting.Their challenge is to continue to research ways to stay viable in current market and constancy conditions. Dell Computers has been very successful with a direct model and virtual integration that may or not work well for Ford. content * ISSUE3 * ANALYSIS4 * ALTERNATIVES6 * RECOMMENDATIONS 7 * IMPLEMENTATION 8 * CONCLUSION8 * REFERENCES9 * ISSUE The Ford Motor Company is facing a number of challenges including the direction of CEO Jac Nasser to focus on customer responsiveness and shareholder value to deal with increasing competitiveness, an intentness with potential over-capacity and the expansion into globalized markets.Ford had begun to implement systems to reduce cycle-time, improve quality and to frown cos ts. Programs included consolidating product development into five Vehicle Centres (VCs), reeingineered processes such as Order to Delivery (OTD), Fort Production System (FPS) and Business to Business (B2B) capacity. Additionally, information flow was examined to overcome geographical constraints, thus becoming a critical component of Fords global approach. During the past decade the company has implemented many programs and processes becoming the most improved auto manufacturer with steady upward trending sales and record profit sharing.The supply chain initially had a base of many competitive suppliers until the 1990s when they began to move toward fewer, long term supplier relationships. Ford fostered relationships with tier one suppliers who would interface with tier two and other suppliers. With Fords support, the suppliers tried a variety of strategies including Just-In-Time (JIT) inventory, Total Quality Management (TQM) and Statistical Process lock (SPC). A limitation emer ged in the variance of IT expertise and capability among the supply chain members.To reach the goal of reduced cycle time, creating a lean and flexible process, Ford is researching Dell Computers successful direct model to see if this virtual integration system would work for them. The direct model reduces the time and costs of third party distribution through direct interfacing with as few partners as possible as a way to improve production and customer responsiveness. The challenge is to determine if this system will work for Ford Motor Company. * ANALYSIS The CEOs directive is complicated by various factors.While Dells direct model works for Dell, it may or may not be effective with Ford. The company has been through a decade of change and adjustments to various processes and directions and while the option is available, a decision is not urgent as Ford is in a fairly good position. Dells direct model involves a customer focus, small numbers of supplier partnerships, customizatio n, a just-in-time inventory and manufacturing. In order to do this, Dell ties in technology to communicate and coordinate these goals and strategies. They use what they call vertical integration.This means that they work very closely with customers and suppliers including actually having staff on grade working directly with customers and partners, sharing information and knowledge to enable flexibility and effectiveness reducing cycle times. Dell establishes partnerships or collaborations with their customers and suppliers which is much like controlled outsourcing. Michael Dell of Dell computers argues that outsourcing is traditionally a way to get justify of a problem. His direct model, in contrast, is partnering with companies who are treated as though they are internal staff.This model improves the level of information sharing and motivation to succeed as a team. Technology means that the information sharing can be easily and effectively done in a win-win type of arrangement. Th e challenge is to maintain these relationships and focus on the trade union movement at hand. Providing suppliers with real-time information and up to date demand enables the supplier to act accordingly to meet Dells requirements. Removing multiple layers and working closely with customers and suppliers removes the possibility of misinformation, reaction time and ability to not single react, but to make more accurate forecasts.Dell has been able to streamline their customer response times by helping the customer decide what they need. They make it easier for the customer to make the decisions and are ultimately preparing for it while the conversation is happening. Dell acts as a consultant and trainer getting direct feedback and key information for planning, research and development. They include key people from a dewy-eyed range of responsibilities in regular meetings to ensure communication, ideas and overall commitment from the total supply chain. Virtual integration goes even further to merge the traditional roles and boundaries of the supply chain.Dell argues that the direct model and virtual integration is beneficial to the customer from distribution to manufacturing and design. This model works for Dell, but whether it would work for Ford is the question. Ford has already reduced its supply chain base by dealing with Tier one suppliers to use Just-In-Time inventory processes and other strategies to improve commitment and capability. They implemented the Ford Production System (FPS), focusing on key parts of the manufacturing process to improve efficiency. The Synchronous Material hightail it (SMF) was developed to ensure a continuous flow of materials.This was done by using lean manufacturing concepts, careful scheduling and sequenced assembly. Their Order to Delivery (OTD) process was also developed to streamline the cycle time, reducing the order to pitch from 65 days to as little as 15 days. In order to do this they used forecasting, keeping 15 days of vehicles in the assembly plants order bank, using regional commingle centers for deliveries and a responsive order amendment process. Last but not least they worked on something called the Ford Retail Network (FRN) to test best practices and to force an alternate distribution channel.The idea was to consolidate Fords efforts to compete against the competition of other auto makers rather than compete against each other. Because Dell and Ford are such different companies it is difficult to know if vertical integration would work. Dell is a smaller company whose current success is due to customer focus, pull demand, speed of response and virtual integration. In contrast, Ford is a much larger company with a complex and long-standing system of supply chain leadership where purchasing was historically hard involved in the various activities of the company.A move to virtual integration requires that roles poke and responsibilities change to allow greater collaboration and info rmation sharing. ALTERNATIVES Differences between the companies include dealer networks, product and process complexity, age and size of the company, technical expertise and control over systems. Ford has a great amount of control, problem forecasting customer needs, higher product complexity, a strong dealer network and unionized labour. Dell is relatively new, there is high technical expertise, the product is not as complex, forecasting can be fairly accurate and their supplier relationships are good.Ford enjoys a significant amount of control over their supply chain, manufacturing, assembly and distribution, while Dell may not be able to exercise control depending on the relationships built and arrangements made. At this time, Ford does not really need to make a decision to change their business model, but there is a push for greater globalization, efficiency and flexibility. They can move toward virtual integration, stay the same, or collect some kind of balance of the direct model with their current model.Because of their size and established supply chain, a move toward vertical integration and a direct model would mean fairly drastic changes and giving up controls that have been carefully developed over the past decade. That said, staying the same would not be advisable, as the market is increasingly competitive on the local and global stage. Ford will be required to look at further adaptations to their operations in order to stay competitive. RECOMMENDATION It would be advisable for Ford to examine vertical integration in at least some areas of their operations.Because this requires high levels of technology, they can work with Tier one suppliers to develop collaborations and more extensive information sharing. Doing nothing is not unremarkably a feasible option in successful business and full integration would be very difficult to accomplish and my not have the results that Dell has due to the various differences in the companies and their products. IMPLEMENTATION Ford can use focus groups and regular meetings to move toward a direct model in at least some areas of the business.The dealer network may be used as an advantage to forecasting if they work more closely with the development teams, manufacturing and assembly plants. The customer focus groups can pay back to develop relationships that help to develop what customers want and might have as potions can be insightful and will improve forecasting. Purchasing, engineering, marketing and other groups can get involved in these focus groups, which may also encourage dialogue and collaboration toward cohesive end results. * CONCLUSIONFord has implemented many strategies successfully and has been forward thinking in their esteem of various models and options. Becoming faster may or may not work to their advantage as buying a car is a decision that is weighed carefully and is a bigger investment than choosing a computer or laptop. The speed at which the company supplies a vehic le once ordered is important, but I suggest, not as important as the customer getting the options, financing and service that they expect with this type of purchase.That said, customers expect greater customization and choice than ever before. Whether Ford takes on this model or chooses to research another model is a step in the right field direction. Supply chain management is a large part of how well the company can respond to customer needs and ultimately realise profit and ongoing competitive advantage. * REFERENCES Austin, Robert D. , Ford Motor Company Supply Chain Strategy, 9-699-198, Harvard Business School Publishing, 1999. Magretta, Joan (2001) The Power of Virtual Integration An discourse with Michael Dell, Harvard Business Review