Engineering Management of Toyota Company - Case Study Example

Toyota Company College Toyota Company Toyota is a company that manufactures cars and it is based in Japan. It is based in a place called Toyota, Aichi in Japan. In 2010 alone, the company employed over three hundred thousand people worldwide and in the same year it was ranked the biggest automobile maker in the world. Since it was started, it has manufactured over 200 million automobiles and it is 11th in ranking in terms of revenue in the whole world. Kiichiro Toyoda founded the company in 1937 and majored in automobiles (Ohno, 1998). The headquarters of Toyota is in Toyota city, Aichi (Ohno, 1998). The company also has an office in Tokyo located in Bunkyo. Another office is in Nagoya a place called Nakamura-ku, Nagoya. The company not only manufactures automobiles, but has gone a step further to offer financial services and has also ventured into building robots (Ohno, 1998). In 1936, the company first entered into passenger business with a model AA. It then held a competition in search for a logo. The entries were overwhelming and it hit a 27,000 mark. One out of all this entries was selected and the name was changed to Toyota from the original family name Toyoda (Ohno, 1998). The new name was received very well and the name itself is associated with well and good fortunes in Japan. The original logo was then to disappear and the new one was used. Toyota in 1989 introduced a new worldwide logo during the commemoration of the companies 50 years in business (Mike, 2003). The logo was also aimed at differentiating the company from other companies with similar brands. The new logo had three ovals that combine to form the letter "T", which stands for Toyota. The oval also had larger meaning, the overlapping simply imply the good beneficial and mutual relationship between the company and the customer. The larger oval that surrounds the inner ones was to signify the global expansion of the company and its unlimited focus to the future (Mike, 2003). In terms of its marketing, the company mainly focuses and insists on the positive experiences derived from the quality and ownership of the vehicle. This experience is targeted in the companies slogans like the one that reads “You asked for it! You got it!" (1975–1979), "Oh, what a feeling!," (1979 – September 1985, in the US), "Who could ask for anything more?" (September 1985 – 1989), "I love what you do for me, Toyota!" (1989–1997), "Everyday" (1997–2001)", "Get the feeling!," (2001–2004), and "Moving Forward" (2004–present) (Kentaro & MIT Japan Program, 1996). Toyota since 1950s has chosen management techniques as the way good to go as opposed to relying on the changer agents. In order to accelerate improvement in the sector, they choose to train production managers and supervisors to oversee the work of the neutral workers (Kentaro & MIT Japan Program, 1996). They then totally dislike the idea of relying on the change agents and the move yielded a lot more positive since its adoption. This technique worked very well because it is a push kind of technique as opposed to pulling by the team. This design of imparting skills on employees is not that of relying on someone who specializes on change (change agent) but it is a natural team leader that oversees the work of the team (Kentaro & MIT Japan Program, 1996). These team leaders are responsible for good morals working spirit and efficiency within the company. The Toyota managing style is very unique and the style have helped propelled the company to greater heights. It is largely an issue of human behavior; Toyota is managed in such a way that its workers are well behaved (Kentaro & MIT Japan Program, 1996). They think well and have right and positive attitude. Members within the organization conduct themselves in a manner that is of age. The Toyota Company trains its staff on how to think and conduct themselves. It is therefore difficult to know why over years the company has displayed the exemplary performance. These virtues instilled on the workers and stuffs as well as management are not visible. Toyota do not focus much on the solutions, the company laid more emphasis on creating the solutions. Due to company awareness that things evolve, and in the future they will not be faced with similar problems as of today, they are therefore focused on creating solutions that will solve future problems (Kentaro & MIT Japan Program, 1996). The management therefore is better off in solving future problems and the company is assured of continuity. This is because nothing will retard the company in future given that solutions to the future problems are identified earlier. This style is therefore unique and they are in contrary to other companies who only look for ready made solutions without an effort to find solutions themselves (Kentaro & MIT Japan Program, 1996). The management also plan on where they want to be in the future. But they made it clear that although the have the point to reach, there is always an obstacle in between. They design an approach to tackle it. They therefore train the stuff not to rely on already available solution because the challenge that comes may exactly not be cured with the already fixed solution (Lu & Kyōkai, 1986). Employers are orientated to believe that there can never be a certainty to a destination we are focused to reach. Anybody therefore claiming a certainty is not being honest. The challenges should be faced as they come and actual facts on the ground are what solutions ought to tackle. The company also embraces adaptiveness. They believe that animals adapt by natural selection but human beings have to adopt consciously. That is the management educate its employees to adapt to changing circumstances by approaching new challenges by devising solutions to tackle it within (Lu & Kyōkai, 1986). The company can not rely on upfront planning because they can not actually see very far, so the approach to it is to adapt to changing circumstances, be innovative and improve on what it already have. The company builds up by learning from the lessons along the way and using the one step as a stepping stone to another (Lu & Kyōkai, 1986). The lessons learned along the way add to the knowledge and it improves the capability a great deal. The organization is organized systematically. It has the systematic procedures that guide the employees within the organization. The employees therefore have the procedure to attain certain goal or objective. For an employee to reach point x he/she knows the route to reaching that point. This has made it very easier for objectives and goals to be attained. In theory also, Toyota has always projected increased sales and penetrating markets that include us markets (Lu & Kyōkai, 1986). They project but a times their achievement don’t reach the target. But the management is also aware of the fact that whatever is projected is just a perceived achievement and gets itself prepared to tackle the challenges along the way as it thrives to reach that target. Their market share has indeed risen in foreign countries and that is a good enough achievement to drive the country forward in terms of motivating the employees (Lu & Kyōkai, 1986). In the Toyota meetings, a series of proposals are made the timeline and the procedures as well as the mode of conducting oneself (Lu & Kyōkai, 1986). These proposals are times very ideal and any common human being rarely abide by them. To adjust takes time. This rules and setting within the company is often no easily adapted with employee and often take time to adapt (Lu & Kyōkai, 1986). The company set a focus of where it wants to reach in a future date. It then set the guidelines and the procedure to achieve that. This guidelines therefore may not go as planned or rather may not deliver as expected. The actual practice will there need adjustments along the way as challenges don’t come exact same way as they are projected (Lu & Kyōkai, 1986). It therefore requires the employee to deviate from the procedure set and adopt the method that will keep the process moving forward. There are however a lot off missing information regarding the relationship between the managers and the employees and between employees themselves. It can not be certain how good moral values and mode of conducting oneself in the company works. You can visit the company as many times as possible but very often you will come out without an answer to that. If that is known it will be easier to analyze in a detailed and more accurate way how the system runs within this organization (Borowski, 2010). Toyota was the most reputable company with its achievements incredibly undisputable. It then sometimes hit the news headlines for all the wrong reasons; poor performance due to its battles with it’s peddling supplier (Borowski, 2010). Toyota has to take this its priority and the earlier it acts the better before things spill out of control. In every other big automobile company mistakes are common and often unavoidable. Recall is also very common. Toyota should therefore take quick step to regain its reputation. The problem with Toyota is not recall because are common in every other company the problem is its go slow to recall (Borowski, 2010). The company should be quick in decisiveness to shut faster the stories going round to damage its reputation. Toyota should show that because it has got an opportunity to, even though it may sometimes not go as planned, it mostly makes it right (Magee, 2008). This have the potential to turn the tables around swiftly and twist the conversation to lines such as “Hey, even when Toyota hits a bump, it is always looking out for the customers’ welfare”, and away from “Toyota screwed up and won’t admit it, so I can’t trust them” (Magee, 2008). If it does this it will then change the public perception of the company. It should take its battle with peddle supplier out of public limelight. There however seems to be no evidence that the sticky pedals were not correctly assembled; that issue therefore seems to touch on the certain composite materials chosen for one part. The issue seems to lie in the software code (Magee, 2008). Module assembling should therefore not be brought into the equation. So revamping production does not go down well with many. The fact that recalls were made in a span of six months is what strikes and bothers many (Magee, 2008). Toyota should also in many cases not allow small problems to accumulate over time. It should be cautious and smarter to tackle problems as it comes in order to move forward and not the other way round. References Borowski, A 2010, Report on the Toyota Company, GRIN Verlag, New York. Hino, S 2005, Inside the Mind of Toyota: Management Principles for Enduring Growth, Productivity Press, Chicago. Kentaro N & MIT Japan Program, 1996, reorganizing for multi-project management: Toyotas new structure of product development centers, Center for International Studies, MIT Japan Program, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Volume 96, Issue 11 of MITJP Lu, D & Kyōkai, N 1986, Kanban Just-in Time at Toyota: Management Begins at the Workplace, Productivity Press, Chicago Magee, D 2008, How Toyota Became #1: Leadership Lessons from the Worlds Greatest Car Company, Penguin Group (USA) Incorporated, Washington. Mike R, 2003, Toyota Kata, McGraw-Hill books, San Francisco Ohno, T 1998, Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production, Productivity Press, Chicago. Read More