In 2006 Toyota took 29.93 hours per vehicle. Nissan took second place in the study, finishing at 29.97 hours, but Harbour said the number was an estimate because Nissan did not provide 2006 statistics. Honda took the number-three spot with 31.63 hours...
General Motors finished at 32.26 hours, and DaimlerChrysler came in at 32.9 hours. Ford finished last in the study, at 35.1 hours, but that was nearly a 2 percent improvement over 2005's 35.8 hours. This was made public today in the Harbour Report, which was released by Harbour Consulting.
"General Motors essentially caught Toyota in vehicle assembly productivity," Ron Harbour, president of Harbour Consulting, said in a statement. "Considering that they will be building vehicles in 2007 with dramatically fewer hourly employees in the U.S., GM, Ford and Chrysler likely will reduce their hours per vehicle significantly."
The productivity gap among the six automakers building vehicles in North America is now the narrowest ever. So what does manufacturing productivity mean to consumers? First, it directly correlates to quality. The top performers in Harbour's productivity study are likely to be the top performers in the 2007 J. D. Power and Associates' Initial Quality Study being released in June. "The correlation between quality and productivity continues to strengthen," Harbour said.
In addition, productivity—and quality—save automakers money, which theoretically means the savings can go back into product development—development of completely new models, added features to models, upgraded interiors or more standard equipment without raising prices.
Full Story here.
Here's Inside Line's take: Toyota Beats Competitors in North American Manufacturing Productivity
Here's AutoObserver's take: Harbour: Toyota Most Productive -- By a Hair
"General Motors essentially caught Toyota in vehicle assembly productivity," Ron Harbour, president of Harbour Consulting, said in a statement. "Considering that they will be building vehicles in 2007 with dramatically fewer hourly employees in the U.S., GM, Ford and Chrysler likely will reduce their hours per vehicle significantly."
The productivity gap among the six automakers building vehicles in North America is now the narrowest ever. So what does manufacturing productivity mean to consumers? First, it directly correlates to quality. The top performers in Harbour's productivity study are likely to be the top performers in the 2007 J. D. Power and Associates' Initial Quality Study being released in June. "The correlation between quality and productivity continues to strengthen," Harbour said.
In addition, productivity—and quality—save automakers money, which theoretically means the savings can go back into product development—development of completely new models, added features to models, upgraded interiors or more standard equipment without raising prices.
Full Story here.
Here's Inside Line's take: Toyota Beats Competitors in North American Manufacturing Productivity
Here's AutoObserver's take: Harbour: Toyota Most Productive -- By a Hair
ateixeira says:
09:01 AM, 06/ 1/07
Maybe Toyota should spend a few more man hours on those Tundra engines. ;-)