What Are the Main Contributors (causes) of The Crisis at Chassis Co’s Athens Plant in Late 2004 (14 Months After Sop)?
There were four main contributors that resulted in the 2004 crisis at ChassisCo’s Athens plant, some of which were the responsibility of Toyota and some of which were the responsibility of ChassisCo.
The first contributory cause is that Toyota conducted untimely audits. Since Toyota delegated near complete responsibility of the project to ChassisCo, they also failed to conduct follow-ups regularly and effectively on the status of the project. Consequently, small problems continually arise which can lead to delays in the project, thereby inhibiting efficiency of the overall project. By the time Walt Bernstein arrived to visit the supplier and realized they were very far behind, it was ultimately too late. All of this could have easily been rectified if Toyota had decided to conduct regular check-ins.
On that note, deciding to delegate complete responsibility of the project management to ChassisCo was another error. Since ChassisCo successfully launched the Toyota 1997 Suprima, they demanded full responsibility of this project. This resulted in ChassisCo erroneously believing they had complete understanding of Toyota’s model and could run the project without problem. This was problematic because Toyota’s independent model for manufacturing requires considerable diligence, planning, inspection, and supervision.
A critical error was committed when they opted to issue contracts to low-bid suppliers that had either never made auto parts before or had minimal experience. This was a poor decision namely because Toyota had established long-lasting relationships with reputable suppliers for their products. By committing this error, ChassisCo potentially jeopardized the relationship Toyota has with their long-lasting suppliers in addition to creating inferior vehicles with potentially poorer quality products. Overall, this was a grave misjudgment in the selection of the supplier.
It was also somewhat confusing why the project did not have sufficient, knowledge experts involved with the project. The decision to relocate their expert employees elsewhere, particularly due to the widening customer base, was an error. This is because it lowered the productivity, knowledge, and overall sense of team spirit at the Athens branch.
What Are Chassisco’s Options Resolving the Crisis? What Would You Do if You Were in Charge?
Chassisco has a couple of options to resolve the crisis. First, it would be recommended that Chassisco eat the lost costs associated with this crisis, even if the likely outcome means that they start the project over from scratch. Once this occurs, Chassisco ought to proactively resolve the issue by seeking support from experienced vendors and individuals in the field. By using the most experienced staff, you can use their expertise and resources to tackle any problems that may arise. Moreover, Chassisco should shift their culture towards one that is more conducive and compatible with that of Toyota. In doing so, this should resolve any risks rather quicker and prevent any further stalling of operations.
It would also be important for Chassisco to carefully evaluate any new suppliers. This would increase the quality and compatibility of the manufacturing process with the Toyota vehicles. Of course, using the established vendors Toyota built long-lasting relationships with would be an idea course of action here.
If I were in charge, I think the most prudent think for me to do would be to ensure that any potential problems are identified as early as possible. This would allow time for the problems to be rectified before they create further, and more significant problems that delay production. Following a systematic procedure in the production of the vehicles would also be a good idea, such as developing a checklist for the plant to work on so that everyone knows the proper procedure. Along the same lines, having a standardized procedure for overseeing the process would be prudent.
What Are Toyota’s Options Resolving the Crisis? What Would You Do if You Were in Charge?
First, Toyota should probably increase the relationship with Chassisco and ensure they are subjected to much more regular check-ins to ensure the process is operating smoothly. Toyota would also be wise to not presume that any supplier would be perfectly fit to produce their vehicles, especially if they are being produced in countries that are not overly familiar with the product and the standards. To mitigate their risk, Toyota might also consider getting new suppliers that would increase both the quality and compatibility of the manufacturing.
If I were in charge, I would first set up regular check-ins with Chassisco to oversee the production and address any possible problems. Random check-ins might also be a good idea. I would also not make the presumption that suppliers are going to be able to complete a significant undertaking such as this and handle the significant increase in responsibility. This is especially true in this instance since Chassisco did not seem fully knowledgeable of the Toyota way and standard of manufacturing vehicles. Order An Essay.
