Bookmark and Share Add RSS Feed   

Yet Another Teachable Moment, Compliments of Toyota

February 28, 2010 – 11:47 am

One of the outcomes of the Toyota recall situation is a plethora of teachable moments.  These run from supply chain implications, communication strategies, quality and process control, even investing – the list goes on.  So, at the sake of piling on, let me add one more.

I recall from my distant and hazy past that Lee Iacocca once commented, regarding the problems with the Corvair, “Safety doesn’t sell”.   That was always considered to be an interesting observation and one that was discussed in great detail in many schools of business.  The quote was taken apart from a number of directions.  One of the meanings that is relevant today is that “safety” as an attribute or CTQ is a qualifier – a must have.  In other words it is not a differentiator (at least until something like Toyota comes along).

Volvo found a segment that placed a high premium on safety.  In this segment safety did sell because it was a CTQ or attribute that was important.

Qualifiers are interesting little devils.  They often get overlooked because of their lack of sexiness in favor of their sexier counterparts – differentiators.

Qualifiers often start off as differentiators but though the me-tooism in marketing are copied and their significance as a differentiator fades and their relegation to qualifier begins.  There are a number of qualifiers in any industry.  Often, but not always they relate to legislation that sets restrictions on certain issues or factors.  In Australia we were confronted by noise ordinances that limited noise levels on large trucks.  The result was that Caterpillar could not sell their large trucks in certain parts of Australia because they could not qualify (too loud).  Failure to qualify can mean a couple of things.  First it may mean that you cannot sell in certain markets.  In other cases it may simply impede penetration into a market.

Sometimes qualifiers can be resurrected as differentiators.  For example, warranties are typically considered to be qualifiers.  However, some innovative companies have been able to change their warranties (lengthen or make easier to use) and they have become an attribute or CTQ that has a differentiating element to them.

How you handle qualifiers from a marketing standpoint is important.  I have seen companies invest marketing resources into qualifiers in an effort to leverage them.   This is wasteful since, in most cases, qualifiers are a check-the-box proposition.  Either you qualify or you do not.

This is an important consideration when developing new products because the speed of penetration will depend on whether you qualify or not.  Considerations of a market penetration strategy should examine qualifiers carefully.  Often it can be expensive to qualify.  For example, in Western Australia we found out that farmers were willing to buy my clients ag equipment from their dealers but the dealer could be located no more than 30 miles from the farmer.  This meant that any ag company seeking to penetrate this market would have to invest in dealerships located at strategic points throughout the state – a pretty expensive proposition.

Six Sigma Marketing identifies growth opportunities in the DEFINE stage of the process.  Each targeted product/market will have its own definition of value and its own set of qualifiers.  These will emerge in the MEASURE stage.  Value models are based on a regression technique that responds to variance.  Qualifiers typically have small Beta weights (little covariance) or actually drop out of the modeling process.  This is a good clue to their nature.  Does that mean that they are unimportant?  Not at all.  It means that from a value perspective they are not CTQs or differentiators.  It does mean they have to be addressed.

Toyota will have to go back and re-qualify.  They will have to convince their markets that their cars are safe.  It won’t matter how much they differentiate their product from other competitors if the market sees them as unsafe.  Considering the cost of lost sales, direct costs of the recall/repair and additional advertising, this will not be inexpensive. Falling out of qualification and then having to re-qualify seldom is.   Ironically, it will be the dealers that bring Toyota back.  This is where the value is being created and where customer loyalty will be won.

  1. 3 Responses to “Yet Another Teachable Moment, Compliments of Toyota”

  2. I’ve never bothered with blogs and didn’t find the link to the blog on the PIT, but two things come to mind that Toyota lost sight of…..Kano and Taguchi, both icon of Japanese quality.

    Kano – Safety is an assumed product characteristic, but if you don’t have it you lose.
    Taguchi’s quality loss function includes a Japanese philosophy that someone that knowingly sells a defective product “is worse than a thief”. The thought process is that if a thief steals $10, then he only gains $10, while a manufacturer will take more than that from society. The costs to society include the cost of the defective part/product, repair costs, costs due to loss of the product, costs due to loss of use, and in this case loss of life.
    Taguchi was an advisor/consultant for Toyota – they obviously strayed from what he taught them.
    -KP

    By Ken Page on Mar 2, 2010

  3. Hi Carrie,

    Thanks for your thoughtful and interesting article.

    I am not sure that Toyota did not meet the requirements of Safety as a qualifier. Toyota and Japanese quality is well know and its reliable cars have been part of the selling point. When an automobile is reliable it is also, in that sense, safe, though of course safety varies in term of which of the automobile’s functions we are talking about.

    As I heard various reports on Toyota’s safety record with the most recent recall, it was pointed out that the failures are very, very few and that Toyota’s overall record is a good one, not that different from other manufacturers.

    This begs the question as to whether a large part of the current attention to Toyota is not primarily politically motivated. The spotlight put on Toyota by the US govt is suspect in light of its (the govt’s) heavy investment in US auto manufacturers and the obvious interest in increasing US auto production, not foreign production.

    I realize that is not the subject of your article; I just wanted to add my two bits.

    By Umberto Sartori on Mar 2, 2010

  4. great information you write it very clean. I am very lucky to get this tips from you.

    By mbt shoes on Jul 19, 2010

Post a Comment

Home  |  Q&A |  Ask a Question |  Articles  |  Videos |  Podcasts |  Interviews |  Columns |  Blogs |  Books |  White Papers
Webinars |  Conferences |  Networking |  Resources |  Advisory Board |  Join  |  Careers With IQPC  |  About |  Contact Us

Six Sigma IQ, a division of IQPC. 2009 All rights reserved.
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Privacy Policy.

e-BIM

e-BIM.com 2009 All rights reserved.
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.