Ford thought they could just “process” everything into existence, that they didn’t need to rely on talent, just a perfect process that was rigidly adhered to.
Just open the cookbook to p.107 and follow the directions.
If you have a perfect process, you’ll have a perfect product, right?
All the engineers were to be just little interchangeable cogs and it didn’t matter where they came from.
They never learned how to manage the unknown in school
Relate to @q2
“ When I was retired on Aug22 2022 I was training 3 engineers and nobody cared. Heck I could have been working on the engine that ran on water and nobody would have known.”
I was in one of those dysfunctional groups where I did the work and the mentoring but 7 others claimed credit for doing so. When I left the LL6 and LL5 asked me if I had turned over all my work to others. I said sure haven’t the rest of the team been doing all the work for years? The look the two of the exchanged was priceless. The a--hats had been knowingly giving others credit for my work for years.
@rb+1k112n3dk Aw the Ford twilight zone been there done that. A religious guy in our group called it Laban-izing. Laban is a character in the Bible.
also the process is often written by so-called process experts who think they know better than the people doing the job day to day.
@rb That's what Ford gets for using a cookbook that is not "CRYSTAL" clear and then continuously samples its product!
Once something is written into a cookbook, people mindlessly follow the cookbook.
One example in the 2005 I wrote some code that automated a process. I also wrote documentation for the process. In 2016 I transferred to another group. The group I left tasked an FCG with converting the existing doc to the flavor of the month cookbook doc format. The FCG made mistakes in the doc that existing engineers just ignored.
A few years later a new FCG decides the cookbook is the source of truth and changes the code to do exactly what the cookbook said. Downstream problems and issues ensued. By then all their senior engineers were gone so I got pulled into a diagnostic meeting. I saw what had happened and advised them to revert the code changes and to correct the cookbook. What ensued was crazy town, after the 5th meeting in which LL6, LL5 and LL4 were all denying the truth I tapped out and said I couldn’t fix stupid. It was insane I had a copy of the original doc, the flawed cookbook, the original source code and the changed source code and yet they denied responsibility.
We had good process and procedure but no discipline to follow it. Leaders would make exceptions and cost cutting would undermine engineering realities.
Our products became too complex for the process and procedure. As engineers we struggled with how to verify what we were doing because stuff was being invented in the PD phase. Teams would be broken up after a product launch just to work on the next best thing. The experts were pushed to stomp our fires.
When I was retired on Aug22 2022 I was training 3 engineers and nobody cared. Heck I could have been working on the engine that ran on water and nobody would have known.
Process isn’t the issue. Process for process sake is the problem.
“Trust the process” only works in certain situations. The problem with Ford is they have no interest in self improvement. It stirs from the head down. BF comes from generational wealth which has shaped every aspect of his worldview without his own self reflection. It’s like the movie multiplicity, where a copy of a copy of copy of a copy eventually becomes mutated to the point of irreverence. A lot like asking AI to do the same task over and over and over again. Henry ford had great ideas that worked in the context of the societal needs but the next generation is more distant than those values and ethics. Rinse and repeat.
Sure Ford will be successful with the help of rooted governmental relationships which are outside the influence of a free market. Eventually the model and the company becomes too inefficient without true innovation and is overtaken by competitors. Unless the state dictates the market. Which can happen…
You can put in place all the design rules you want but if one doesn’t understand them then they are worthless. Ford fired and forced retired many authors without training or mentoring the new engineers. Hacket and Fartley moves.
@bc+1k112n3dk The LEAN system was developed by Toyota. Mostly is an adaptation of the production lines in a plant to be applied to the rest of the company. After large companies have a product, they are not interested in keeping innovative people around.
Ford’s roots lie in the rural Anglo-Irish plantation system, where low value added labor did simple, back-breaking work. Peasants from Ireland migrated to the US to work in factories, and the plantation management system was adapted to car production. The assembly line allowed for building cars using simple tasks that were easily learned. However, in time automation has eliminated most simple, easily learned tasks. The remaining tasks require training and experience. To understand Ford’s roots read about the 19th century Anglo-Irish plantation system. To understand how to make it competitive read about development of Toyota’s process management system.
@a2 Easier than that, DON'T MAKE DEFECTS! D-U-H!
@OP if you’ve got high warranty, create computer programs to sort through warranty claims and write Jira’s. All you have to do is label the program as artificial intelligence and the warranty problem is solved.