The two retail companies picked are Walmart and Costco whose 2017 Financial statement links are provided below: WALMART https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/ wmt/financials?query=income- statement COSTCO https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/ cost/financials?query=income- statement Both organizations are well known brands and position themselves well with their customer base. Walmart’s value proposition is “We save people money so they can live better”. On the other hand, Costco’s value proposition is “All-in-one convenience and everyday affordability”. Both retailers focus on cost saving for their customers. Looking at their financial statements and by analyzing them a few key areas are evident when comparing the two organization. Looking at the current ratio and quick ratio we can determine the short-term solvency of each organization. The current ratio can be determined by dividing the assets by the liabilities. Walmart’s current ratio sits at 0.86 while Costco’s sits at 0.99. The quick ratio is c
The article reviews different cases of quality failures and their impacts in terms of product units recalled.
The article examines cases from different automotive manufacturers spanning many years of manufacturing. The companies examined; Ford, Chrysler, General Motors and Honda at the time were all companies who are in compliance with the International Organizations Standards (ISO) 9000; their suppliers were required to be compliant with the automotive Quality System Requirements QS-9000. QS-9000 was phased out at the end of 2006. It has been replaced by ISO/TS 16949:2002 and ISO 9001:2008 for suppliers in the automotive supply chain (Quality System Registrar, 2019)
Briefly, the ISO standards contain the caveats:
1) Needs to demonstrate the ability to consistently provide products and services that meet customer and applicable statutory and regulatory requirements.
2) Aims to enhance customer satisfaction through the effective application of the system, including processes for improvement of the system (ASQ/ANSI/ISO 9001, 2015).
Compliance with industry standards does not appear to have helped automotive manufacturers with regard to preventing the recall of millions of their vehicles during the time period this article was written. An examination of cars manufactured in 2019 and those designed for release in 2020 shows that there are many recalls of vehicles involving nearly all the main automotive manufacturers (Consumer Affairs, automotive recalls, 2019). The article "The Greatest Quality Management Failures in History" cites other types of manufacturing failures which resulted in product recall. Perhaps the most notable is the labeling error on the oral contraceptives manufactured by Endo pharmaceuticals because the error was traced back to a specific facility. The other cases cited do not mention the errors as being identified to a particular facility, only the location, as in the case of Mattel toys. Mattel had outsourced production to an overseas company which owned facilities with ISO 9000 certification.
In answering the question, I do not believe that these product failures could be completely avoided with more focus being placed on quality management, however, the failure rate could certainly be improved. The instance of the labeling error on the oral contraceptives is different than the other cases because the company identified the specific failure. In the instance of the automotive failures, we are not given enough information in this article with regard to the types of automotive failures. The article states "Ford Motor Company has recalled over 24 million vehicles for various malfunctions since 2004. General Motors recalled 1.9 million vehicles in March of 2010 alone, and Chrysler had a double recall of its minivans in 2011." From a quality management perspective, I would need more information as to whether the problems came from design faults, blueprint issues resulting from incorrectly calibrated machinery or process issues such as not following procedures or poor workmanship. Improved quality management at all stages of automotive design and production would undoubtedly have a beneficial effect on the overall failures still being reported by the automotive industry.
The majority of modern vehicles contain large amounts of technology to assist driver's in either their daily commute or on the racetrack. Performance cars have traction control and different "levels" of power built into their computer systems, commuter vehicles have lane change warnings, proximity warnings and reversing aids. The prospect of completely autonomous (self-driving cars) has been on the minds of automotive manufacturers for some time.
A recent survey by Capgemini states " The Capgemini study captures some of that ambivalence and illustrates the challenges ahead. Asked what emotion describes how they felt about self-driving cars, 59 percent said "anticipation" and 52 percent said "surprise" -- but 48 percent said "fear" and 43 percent said "loss of control/helplessness." And just 32 percent said "trust" and 28 percent said "confidence" (Priyanka, 2019). The survey was the result of surveys from 5,500 consumers and 280 Auto-executives. The study goes on to state that consumers trust automotive manufacturers over tech start up companies to produce a safe vehicle.
Firstly, I think it is important to clarify the difference between the driver assist systems currently in use, and the prospective "autonomous" self driving car of the future. The Autopilot and Super Cruise systems utilized by Tesla and Cadillac respectively offer safety features to help prevent accidents and warn drivers of impending danger. The Autopilot system has been fitted to some Tesla models since 2015. The system combines radar-controlled cruise control with automatic steering to stay within painted lane lines. What Autopilot system fails to do is recognize stationary objects; this has been deliberately programmed into the system to avoid the vehicle misinterpreting bridges or overpasses. Despite two fatalities involving this system, Tesla did not recall their cars preferring to offset the responsibility to the driver for failing to use the system correctly (WIRED, 2018). Documented crashes of autonomous vehicles are limited. Perhaps the most well known is the Uber crash in Arizona. This incident involved the death of a pedestrian due to the safety driver of the Uber vehicle streaming TV to her phone instead of surveying the road for hazards (Davis, 2018).
Until drivers understand the features and limitations of driver assist vehicles compared to completely autonomous vehicles, I do not think it will be possible to ensure total consumer satisfaction. Driverless and driver- assist systems obviously need to have some type of mandatory training included with the sales package. This might be difficult to enforce without the assistance of the federal or state governments, however this is one area where a company can take ownership of Quality Management by requiring purchasers of new vehicles to undergo training. Without legal enforcement and driver's licence endorsements, problems will arise when second hand vehicles are transferred to untrained drivers.
References:
ASQ/ANSI/ISO/9001: 2015: Quality Management Systems Requirements. Retrieved 10/6/19 from: https://asq.org/
Consumer Affairs - automotive recalls (2019). Retrieved 10/6/19 from: https://www.
Davis, A. (2019). The unavoidable folly of making humans train self driving cars. WIRED. Retrieved 10/6/19 from: https://www.wired.com/
Priyanka, R. (2019). Capgemini Survey - the autonomous car report. Retrieved 10/7/19 from: https://www.capgemini.
The Greatest Quality Management System Failures in History (http://
SRI - Quality System Registrar. Retrieved 10/6/19 from: https://www.
WIRED (2019). Tesla's Autopilot was involved in another deadly car crash. Retrieved 10/7/19 from: https://www.wired.com/
Comments