Post by account_disabled on Jan 2, 2024 4:37:56 GMT -5
Reposted from: More like this Using Open Source for Safer Generative AI Experiments Don’t Be Distracted by the Generative AI Hype Leveraging Generative AI for Marketing: From Harvard Business School To: Addressing Generative Cybersecurity Threats You must be logged in to post a comment. First time here? Sign up for a free account: comment on articles and access more articles. Magazine Fall Year with Ford: Collaborating to Create Value Sherwood Frey Jr. and Michael Schlosser Year Month Day Reading Time: Minutes Topics Workplaces, Teams, and Culture Collaboration Subscribe for Access and Share What to Read Next MIT Year of Artificial Intelligence Must Read the top 10 articles of the year Twenty Years of Open Innovation Adding Cybersecurity Expertise to Your Boardroom More than three years ago.
Thomas Lyons et al. Points out that U.S. manufacturers and their suppliers are developing new ways to relate to each other. This climate change is reflected in: the emergence of multifunctional teams for developing cross-technology projects; a reduction in the total number of suppliers; the extension of contracts to span the service life of components; an increasing reliance on service Job Function Email List providers such as design, R&D and engineering. increases; and purchasing components and subassemblies rather than individual parts. Lyons et al. Manufacturers are generally enthusiastic about these trends and are acting as initiators seeking ways to improve quality, reduce project costs, reduce supplier relationship complexity, and enhance R&D support. On the other hand, they stereotype providers as taciturn, fearful of leaking confidential information, fearful of expanding services without compensation, and fearful of losing operational autonomy.
The authors challenge industry to collaborate to manage the evolution of these emerging relationships and share benefits equally among the parties involved. A year later, based on a survey of U.S. auto suppliers, Susan Helper reported that suppliers' concerns were justified. The old behavior of aggressive competition remains. Large (and stronger) manufacturers obtain concessions and achieve improvements at the expense of smaller (and weaker) suppliers. From the supplier's point of view, the atmosphere of cooperation has not yet formed; the manufacturer has gained and the supplier.
Thomas Lyons et al. Points out that U.S. manufacturers and their suppliers are developing new ways to relate to each other. This climate change is reflected in: the emergence of multifunctional teams for developing cross-technology projects; a reduction in the total number of suppliers; the extension of contracts to span the service life of components; an increasing reliance on service Job Function Email List providers such as design, R&D and engineering. increases; and purchasing components and subassemblies rather than individual parts. Lyons et al. Manufacturers are generally enthusiastic about these trends and are acting as initiators seeking ways to improve quality, reduce project costs, reduce supplier relationship complexity, and enhance R&D support. On the other hand, they stereotype providers as taciturn, fearful of leaking confidential information, fearful of expanding services without compensation, and fearful of losing operational autonomy.
The authors challenge industry to collaborate to manage the evolution of these emerging relationships and share benefits equally among the parties involved. A year later, based on a survey of U.S. auto suppliers, Susan Helper reported that suppliers' concerns were justified. The old behavior of aggressive competition remains. Large (and stronger) manufacturers obtain concessions and achieve improvements at the expense of smaller (and weaker) suppliers. From the supplier's point of view, the atmosphere of cooperation has not yet formed; the manufacturer has gained and the supplier.