Undercover Boss
JoeRaisin
Addresses the issue of CEO's who have no idea of what it is like to work
for the company they lead - or even the slightest idea of what the
company does for that matter.
One of my (many) pet peeves is that these CEO's move around from company
to company between industries that have little or nothing to do with one
another.
How is someone supposed to lead a company if they are unfamiliar with
the industry?
jimbo
> How is someone supposed to lead a company if they are unfamiliar with
> the industry?
Management principles are the same be it turnips or trousers.
Jim
F.H.
Right. Question no expenses except labor.
Fred Exley
"jimbo" <jbl...@videotron.ca> wrote in message
news:7f974be0-7e8c-4988...@36g2000yqu.googlegroups.com...
True enough when it comes to running a companies internals -organizing,
motivating, corporate turnarounds, financing growth, etc. But if they are
unfamiliar with the industry, they don't usually do so well in strategic
planning:
"John Sculley was vice-president (1970-1977) and president of PepsiCo
(1977-1983), until he became CEO of Apple on April 8, 1983, a position he
held until leaving in 1993. ...
...However, his stint at Apple remains controversial due to his departure
from founder Steve Jobs sales structure, particularly regarding his decision
to compete with IBM in selling computers to the same types of customers. He
was ultimately forced out of Apple in 1993 as the company's margins eroded,
sales diminished and stock declined..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Sculley
JoeRaisin
Well, that's what THEY keep saying anyway. In the meantime the
industrial base of this country keeps slipping.
All they understand is keeping the stock price up with little or no
regard to employee welfare and what's going out the door at the end of
the day.
jimbo
> Well, that's what THEY keep saying anyway. In the meantime the
> industrial base of this country keeps slipping.
That is simply b/c the U.S. is uncompetitive in the world market. Take
a look at how Germany, with a welfare state is still one of the
largest exporters of manufactured goods.
I live in Montreal and 30 years ago we had a shipyard and a lot of
heavy manufacturing like rail cars, locomotives, paper machinery and
the like. They got driven out of the city by environmental laws and
high taxes and then out of the country. We have very little
manufacturing today in Canada. Our productivity is lower than the U.S.
and that costs each Canadian 3,000$ a year.
Jim
jimbo
> Right. Question no expenses except labor.
I worked for 4 years as an Industrial Engineer for a management
consulting company and the biggest shocker to me at first was that
most of the companies with problems really didn't know what their
product(s) cost.
Jim
F.H.
Uncompetitive is code for employee's getting a living wage, eh? Sucks
when you can't pollute and have to pay taxes. Where are the US and
Canadian manufacturers now? How are the stock holders and CEO's doing?
Would be truly ironic if we wound up switching roles with China the way
it was a half century ago, they produce, we buy. Heh, buy with what?
jimbo
> Uncompetitive is code for employee's getting a living wage, eh?
Do you really believe it is that simple?
Jim
F.H.
How long ago? These days, with computers, every moment a person spends
on the job is charged to some project or job number. Even pre-PC (IME)
costs, (especially labor) were tracked closely.
Tex
wrote:
Everything in life deemed to be complicated is actually simple. Simple
is the most complicated thing in life.
F.H.
My intuition and my experience (especially with multinationals) leans
that way. Same for "overtaxed." Some people call outsourcing,
relocating, using temps etc., progress and of course, it *is*. But not
for everyone. The train has left the station, all thats left is to
record the scenery called history. How could this happen? Inevitable.
jimbo
> How long ago? These days, with computers, every moment a person spends
> on the job is charged to some project or job number. Even pre-PC (IME)
> costs, (especially labor) were tracked closely.
The problem is not direct labour but the fixed and variable indirects
which make up the burden rate. Also, most shops had large variances
beteen estimated materials and actual materials.
Jim
jimbo
Same for "overtaxed." Some people call outsourcing,
> relocating, using temps etc., progress and of course, it *is*.
We are in a global ecomomy. Compete or get out of that business. The
U.S. exports 50% of its production and that means it must be efficient
in some areas.
> The train has left the station, all thats left is to
> record the scenery called history. How could this happen? Inevitable.
Empires have been rising and falling since the beginning of recorded
history. Getting fat and complacent and resting on one's laurels seems
to have something to do with it.
Jim
F.H.
I knew my material costs before I quoted jobs. Most IME, do. Mileage,
I'm sure varies. I still maintain that the number one target of cost
cutting and overhead reduction is labor. Sometimes to the companies
detriment.
F.H.
> On Feb 8, 12:09 pm, "F.H." <connectut...@verizon.net> wrote:
> Same for "overtaxed." Some people call outsourcing,
>> relocating, using temps etc., progress and of course, it *is*.
>
> U.S. exports 50% of its production and that means it must be efficient
> in some areas.
"Some" yes. Manufacturing has been in a downward trend for years.
>> The train has left the station, all thats left is to
>> record the scenery called history. How could this happen? Inevitable.
> Empires have been rising and falling since the beginning of recorded
> history.
The scenery changes a little, the end result, not so much. The good
part comes when we run out of oil, and Monsanto (Forbes magazine
corporation of the year) owns the patents on all the seed for all grown
food while some other Enron type corporation owns the water rights.
> Getting fat and complacent and resting on one's laurels seems
> to have something to do with it.
"Something," yes, (a cultural deal) but not everything. Ask a guy whose
job went offshore if he was "fat and complacent." He lost his
bargaining power to cheaper labor. *Now* maybe he'll get fat (no more
gym memberships) and depressed.
Fred Exley
Then there's labor usage variance vs. labor efficiency variance, which may
be subdivided into yield and mix variances, direct vs. indirect labor, etc.
These formulas help management figure out such things as, are we paying that
guy too much, or is he working too slow?
Mark Warner
> "jimbo" <jbl...@videotron.ca> wrote
>>
>> Management principles are the same be it turnips or trousers.
>
> motivating, corporate turnarounds, financing growth, etc. But if they are
> unfamiliar with the industry, they don't usually do so well in strategic
> planning:
In my own limited, simplified experience, I can attest to that.
I've had success applying a standard set of inventory control principles
and procedures in widely differing industries. But where I *really*
shined was after I learned my way around the industry itself, and was
able to take those broad general principles and procedures and refine
them to the specific task at hand.
Case in point: Honda uses what's called a Main Relay, which controls
(among other things) the power to the electric fuel pump. When it fails,
the car cranks and cranks but won't start. Happens in hot weather a lot.
They have a different part number for damn near every year, make, and
model. Demand by part number would not justify stocking any of them.
However, I got tired of getting heat for *not* stocking them, and having
"car down" situations all the time while waiting on a special order.
After physically taking several different part numbers apart, I
discovered that the guts of them were the same -- the difference was in
the mounting configuration! If we popped the guts out of a new one and
put it in the housing of the failed part, it worked just fine. Over
time, I found that there were only about three or four actual working
variations, rather than the dozens of part numbers that were technically
supposed to be used. I *could* justify stocking those three or four
variations, thereby taking our "car down" situations down to zero for
this particular failure, keeping our customer satisfaction high, and
making good money in the process.
The moral of the story is that I could have sat in my office at a
computer terminal, done all the SKU analysis, and been completely
justified in *not* stocking these things. But, by knowing how cars work,
getting my hands dirty, and convincing the mechanics that this was a
worthwhile approach (which took some doing, as they didn't like the idea
of using different parts than what were called for in the catalogs), we
were able to provide better service and were more profitable in this one
area. Someone not familiar with the product/industry would have been
perfectly justified *on* *paper* by keeping these items on special order
status, but the customer and the dealership would have suffered
nonetheless.
--
Mark Warner
...lose .inhibitions when replying
F.H.
You would have flourished in the machine shop environment. Its all
about planning and shortcuts without losing quality. For someone who
learned computers first, seeing what computerized machinery can do (like
machining 5 wing spars for a 747 at once) can be a mind blower.
Chronocidal Charlie
"Old Trucker's" little brother was an advanced CNC Machinist 'nd Lathe
Mill Set-up Operator, Programmer etc. During Kenny's last days while I
spent a lot of time step and fetch it fer em, while he was in hospice
environment, his brother kept me spell bound 'nd entertained,
enlightened and brain straining exercised for hours on end with the
*wonders* of the art. ;-)
CC