@5lzz+1gmzIdKg we will see where the company is five years from now. You live off the profits from the F-Series not your so-called DATA Mining. So, keep drinking the KOOL-AID.
14 replies (most recent on top)
too many old farts responsible for all quality issues in the last 15 years are still around. They need to go
At least a voice of reason;
Post ID: @rcn+1gmzIdKg
Cuts better come sooner rather than later. Quality and flawless launches are suffering. We do not need Lighting launch to falter. Only way to prevent this is to make deep cuts to the work force. Primarily in product development, manufacturing, and quality activities.
I'm glad leadership knows this.
Talking to LL4s they have said that management was tasked with 90 days to come back with a plan after the announcement of Ford Blue, Model E. This includes "restructuring" & "separation packages".
Funny, I taught a class at Ford years ago on Activity-Based costing. The class was composed of Mazda engineers (three), and ten Ford engineers. The Ford engineers could care less of learning the material, but the Mazda engineers ate it up, with additional requests for assignments and knowledge. This is back around 2007 but it gave me an idea of what good versus bad corporate culture does to employee morale.
Young, skilled people will not accept Ford Blue positions as it is not seen as the future. Those in Ford Blue are looking to move. But there is work that needs to be done. Blue is, for the most part, dependent on older engineers. Some older engineers may be willing to accept these assignments for a while, but with little incentive to stay, will wind up leaving.
Funny that Ford management is unable to accept the truth about what ails the company (themselves). They just keep searching for people who will tell them what they want to hear, unfortunately they then proceed to compensate the found con artists handsomely while they do massive amounts of damage.
An example of how messed up Ford is
My sister was hired into a group in 2000. She was in a ITO group. It quickly became clear that in a group of 18 she was the only one who actually could do the job. The supervisor had just been rotated to the group, suspected the team was unskilled and hired my sister. My sister worked hard and created and automated processes and then set about having weekly training classes for the team starting with the basics. Only 3 of the 18 wanted to learn. The others started a character assignation game and complained that the weekly training was interfering with their work. The LL4 paid my sister a visit and told her she could only continue with the training if it was during lunch or after hours.
My sister quit a few years later as she was tired of doing all the work while the majority of the team did nothing. The slackers are all still at Ford, the 3 who wanted to learn are not.
The interesting thing is my sister was the oldest person on the team, she was in her 40s at the time and her coworkers were in their 20s and 30s.
As others have noted Ford repels talent and retains slackers.
@vsu+1gmzIdKg That was before bonuses were paid out and everyone started leaving. We have hemorrhaged a lot of talent in the last month, and a lot of it is in the skillset that JF and others have gone on record saying we have to attract and retain. Lots of management meetings going on right now that are talking about what can be done to keep this talent. The real answer is to pay more, but that raises your costs and lowers your profits, something Ford cannot afford to do right now. (See the year end results and the fallout from it.)
So we are in the proverbial rock and hard place where we cannot attract the talent we want, we cannot keep the talent we have. In the meantime, we have a lot of 25+ year hangers on that are just hoping to get to 35 years PLUS get a great buyout incentive. This is all going to come to a head at some point. There are no easy answers. Look at Chrysler and GM in 2008 for what really is on the horizon for Ford. Like it or not.
@rcn+1gmzIdKg must be from IT.
JF said himself we have too many people and we don't have the right people for the company to march forward towards the digital future. I take it that means most of today's employees are no longer a good fit for Ford.
Yes @rcn+1gmzIdKg, because the problems with quality and launches is because we have too many people. ROFL
What a tool.
@qla+1gmzIdKg It's often difficult to tell if people are being sarcastic or just trolling, but I'm guessing @rcn+1gmzIdK's comments were one of these.
rcn+1gmzIdKg Can you go into more detail and data to back your statement? The lower ranks only follow the orders and direction they are given by people like you,
- How many quality issue are because of TVM? Not the GSR or LL6
- Complexity - Again the GSR & LL6 have zero say
- Buildable combinations. Funny how Toyota can make money on a sedan with only 32 combinations but we have over 30k for the same segment. Again that is not an GSR or LL6 But top management.
- My favorite by passing build process on CD6. Again, that was not a GSR or LL6 but top-level management. Funny thing some of those people are still in there positions.
So if you live in a glass House I would not throw stones.
Cuts better come sooner rather than later. Quality and flawless launches are suffering. We do not need Lighting launch to falter. Only way to prevent this is to make deep cuts to the work force. Primarily in product development, manufacturing, and quality activities.
I'm glad leadership knows this.
Is May a realistic possibility?