Engineers to regain lead at Ford and suppliers 8

[jetmaker]

Interesting forum... and here are my two cents worth.

With regards engineering qualifications of supplier: anyone that believes another company's engineers are less qualified than those at the OEM is just plan ignorant. In fact, in today's world of high performance parts, often OEMs can not compete against the "engineering knowhow" of specialty shops. These shops are in business because they know their business, and their engineers are the most qualified to do the job. In such cases, outsourcing is beneficial to an OEM, and not a liability.

I will not get into the topic of outsourcing except to say this. Outsourcing is not a bad thing when done for the right reasons; but more often than not, it is not done for the right reasons.

 

[GregLocock]

It has got /nothing/ to do with the competence of the engineers.

The reason that outsourcing the engineering is bad is that cars are integrated systems, not a collection of disparate parts. It is (in my opinion) impossible to write a cost-effective comprehensive interface document for any resonably large sub-system.

Cheers

Greg Locock

 

[HDS]

Greg
Another way of saying that is.

It is not possable to write a comprehensive interface document for any resonably large sub-system wihtout designing the entire system.

The lastest Wards has more on this subject.

 

[mloew]

HDS,

It is possible, just not cost effective. As I mentioned in my 18 Jun post, it is the lack of effective systems integrations that negatively impacts performance across systems boundaries. Greg is absolutely right about the quality level of the engineers. The real issue to be studied is about how to use the brains available to produce the highest quality product within the constraints of the engineering environment. Not an easy problem.


Best regards,

Matthew Ian Loew

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

 

[Slowzuki]

I'm reading this slightly confused, but then realize in Canada, engineer and engineering are protected terms by law! An engineer has to belong to a professional association and minimum of a Bachelors Degree in Engineering or Applied Science plus pass an ethics exam!

I guess it is a little different in the US?

Ken

 

[plasgears]

Slowzuki,
Yes, it's different here. It's a throwback to the days when promising individuals with talent were allowed to prevail in industry even without credentials.

However, one talented fellow at GE was sent to MIT at company expense to get credentials, and he turned out to be one of the best design engineers on the staff. Every time you see a modern high performance jet with variable nozzle or vectoring nozzle, think of Dudley N. He designed a working prototype of a vectoring nozzle back in ~1970. The modern version is now planned for production.

 

[Rob45]

Hoo boy, I'll believe it when I see it!
Every few years, Ford comes out with a press release like this, but sticks with business as usual, in Dearborn at least.
It's never dawned on Ford management that contracting out your engineering work, whether to a supplier or to a contract eng'g house, simply gives someone else your enginneering expertise.
Case in point: Carron & Co. did the "engineering" on the original Explorer - which simply meant that Truck Eng'g wasn't budgeted to do the work, but had to lead Carron by the hand and do it anyway.
By the time the Explorer launched, however, Carron had picked up some valuable experience, which they promptly took to Chrysler when they (Carron) did the engineering on the Dodge Durango, a truck remarkably like the Explorer, don't you think?

Anyway, this Ford announcement is just a sop to the so-called automotive "analysts" (think 'Maryann Kelleher')to try get them to revise their dire predictions concerning Ford's future.
Meanwhile, back in Dearborn, the layoffs and beatings will continue until morale improves.
:-(

PS: BTW, there are a lot of Chrysler engineers who really don't care HOW it's done in Germany...

 

[CanEngJohn]

Slowzuki

Actually you should double check your info. In practice Professional Engineer is protected by law but once you get past that things get grey in a hurry (Quality Engineer quite often being the best example).

Ok. the rest of my 1.5 (in US$) cents ...
I have worked at several Tier 1 suppliers supplying GM, Chrysler, Ford, Mercedes, BMW and Toyota. The key problem with Tier 1 engineering is a lack of competent Engineers. This is not a competency issue but more a quantity issue.

The costing requirements coming out of the Big 3 these days often doesn't provide enough money to feed true engineering services at this level. Hence we have a lot of Designers and Technicians who only have half an idea how to engineer properly (usually they look at existing designs and go after similar models) and only a couple of true Engineers. In the plants most of the engineering is done by kids just out of school or by guys who have 20+ years of practical experience but no credentials. The combination works well for day to day issues but often struggles with new concepts.

The result is supplier engineers that are component experts and only amateur or moderately fluent vehicle engineers. What the strut Engineer assumes will not necessarily match up to what the person working on the driveaxle is thinking.

While outsourcing and relying on the supplier to Engineer their product does make sense what the Big 3 relied on is that the supplier would also become an expert on how their component would assemble into the vehicle and interact on the vehicle. The catch being that the Big 3 never handed over the money to the Tier 1 suppliers to be able to support that. In essence the Big 3 are getting the Engineering they were/are willing to pay for.

 

[jetmaker]

CanEngJohn,

I believe in Canada, the word "Engineer" is protected by the provincial regulator board. They are very strict on the useage of the term by unlicensed engineers in which it can lead to potential confusion. Often the consequences for using the term "engineer" results in a warning, unless it is in a fraudulent manner to decieve the public/employer. The use of the P.Eng designation, or calling oneself a "Professional Engineer" is bound to get you fined heavily even the first time.

When I worked for a Canadian company after graduation, my job title was "stress analyst". When I got my P.Eng, then it was changed to "stress engineer". Last I heard, the PEO was making every effort to crack down on poeple using "Quality Engineer", "Computing Engineer", etc... if they were not licensed, simply because it was resulting in a confusion amungst the public.

Have a great day.

 

[CanEngJohn]

jetmaker

That is the theory.

Practically however I am unaware of the Professional Engineers of Ontario (PEO) having yet to win any cases to penalize companies using the Quality or Systems Engineer job titles.

These grey areas are the CQE (Certified Quality Engineer) and MCSE (Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer) designations that are available to individuals without a B. Eng or a license. In all cases where a company has been fined they have taken it to court and won. The only cases the PEO has won have been in cases where the misuse of the Professional Engineer designation has been violated or where services are rendered to the public without a P. Eng.

(A key point here is the ioffering of services to the public. A Quality Engineer or MCSE is not necessarily offering services to the public but to private companies.)

There are other issues as well and the PEO and Engineers are trying to resolve them but I would argue that the term engineer is still not controlled enough to be considered a protected term. Once we get a win in the courts then I might to start to change my opinion. Until then it isn't a law if you can't enforce it.

 

[mloew]

There is an article in the 13 October 2003 issue of Automotive News on the same subject of the Wards article:

Engineering: Ford takes control
500 new employees will monitor parts; suppliers lose clout
By Julie Armstrong

http://www.autonews.com/article.cms?articleId=45531

Nothing much new, same criticisms of above posts still apply.

Best regards,

Matthew Ian Loew
"Luck is the residue of design."
Branch Rickey

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

 

[mloew]

This just hit me. In the Automotive News article from my post immediately above there is the following statement:

"Ford's shift is bad news for suppliers that want to engineer systems, which is more profitable than producing components."

Is there any proof of this? What is meant by profits, more absolute profits because the price of the "system" is higher, and/or margins are greater?



Best regards,

Matthew Ian Loew
"Luck is the residue of design."
Branch Rickey

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

 

[willi3b]

What i posted on the other thread applies here as well, but i would add this: the buck drives the design - competitors underbid to get in, quality is driven by the top tier and QS. More than anything, in my world, new technology improves the product, SLS, direct links, and testing, but the ideas still have to be good. Nothing is very new, the same thing with wheels, just more buttons, and maybe safer. If it's all built faster, and computers saved a ton of time and money, why does the end product cost more? I think the end user demands more. Notice how cars look alike, (NASCAR) and the ones that don't, don't matter? Same reason we're wearing bell bottoms again, and some new group found an old R&B and thought it's a great new song! Anyway, i'm one of the 30 year plus guys, started on the board, using Catia now for plastics. I still prefer to work with the degreed project manager, preferably an engineer not a manager. We exchange ideas and compromise for a good design. I have a business degree myself, tried my own business, that sucks. I'm very happy now on the tube flying through the 3d world, get paid plenty, and have more fun than ever. At the end of the day, i think i won in life. We are a tier two to the big 3 and the benefits trickle down. ALSO, i ran into alot of degreed engineers that were not born to be engineers or designers, but thought the money was good, or got pushed into it, same as doctors, some are worse than plumbers. SO: surround yourself with road scholars, i do like experience, degree or no, the winner is the one with the best idea - oh by the way ( btw for you young ones ) it's all an idea!!! You gotta have one first, preferably a good one, and most have been thought of before, so don't re-invent the wheel, go with a proven one, it's all based on i - that stands for information - it's out there, find it, you could be president, if you want, but make sure you like your job. That's all - except this: if you don't like it, get the hell out of my life, you are slowing me down, i don't want to share in your missery, go do something you like or know how to do, or just go away - NO WHINING!!!

 

[c2s]

Lee Iacocca got it right ... "you're either born a car man or you're not". What stikes me about this thread is that Lee's axiom (if you want to call it that) seems to apply regardless which side of the issue you are on. At the end of the day though, there is no substitute for an engineer.
As for outsourcing engineering, it's been that way since the earliest days. The challenge is to keep it ballanced - trading off loss of direct control and understanding for potential cost savings. The scales need to be tipped back a little.
Kevin