Short term profit at the expense of everything else. At some point there will be a reckoning on all the damage this cult has done to society, but I don't expect it to happen any time soon.
I am confident the reporting would likely be captured by the manufacturers anyway and there would be a lot of arbitrary inputs into the reports, but something to fight the short term profit taking you describe.
It's extremely hard to know ahead of time which products will ultimately be reliable and which will be flaky. Most flaky components weren't designed with that in mind -- there are some exceptions, but maintenance headaches are normally a mistake by the manufacturer. And even setting that aside, a big part of "cheap to maintain" is how many units you ship: part of why it's cheap to maintain a Civic or a Corolla is because they made millions of them, parts are everywhere, and every shop knows how to deal with them. But knowing up front if your product is going to be a hit or a flop is just not generally possible, even though that has a huge impact on maintenance costs.
Even in a world of angels, I don't know that this idea would work in general. Maybe if it was specific to some industries where the costs are easier to estimate?
For example the Ankarsrum food mixer (successor to the classic Electrolux Assistent) entry at Elkjop.no states that the expected lifetime is 30 years and that spares will be available for 12 years.
https://www.elkjop.no/product/hjem-rengjoring-og-kjokkenutst...
The French idea looks good. IKEA don't provide that information here :-(
[1] A report on this at https://www.corporateleadersgroup.com/files/cisl_digital_pro...
Companies like consumer reports should do this sort of thing.
MBAs had no long-term vision, so in each company they infested, they made poor strategic decisions such as moving manufacturing overseas, which then forced other companies to move their manufacturing overseas.
The countries they chose have zero respect for intellectual property. So now what's left are zombie companies milking their cash cows dry as international competitors arise and take their market share.
The economic basis for that appeared way before the first MBA got a job.
“My goal is to make money”
Other people think:
“I need to make some money to achieve my goal”
There are plenty of people from the second category that run businesses, but probably more from the first though.
A company should stay true to its mission and vision.
But I notice you didn't actually give an example of an outlier MBA that did not behave this way and contributed positively to the company they ran?
Generally one is not supposed to stereotype groups based on characteristics outside their control.
on edit: added in abhorrent.
But he is right in the sense that a company leader needs to occasionally leave the meeting room and get in the factory floor, get direct exposure to customers and see things firsthand.
We would be already in Mars if we had not stopped doing that.
I can't see how, the same people pushing for WTO/NAFTA are those who profited immensely from outsourcing in the 80s-90s are now the same one who likely stand to benefit the most from either supply chain disruptions, and war.
The truth is that JD is just another monopoly ([0] over 50% market share of tractors) that represents the underlying aspects of crony capitalism writ large. This is just another example how the mantra that 'tech should be in everything' needs to die, and how pervasive these horrible practices can become for the small sector of humans (less than 1% of the Human population feeds the other 99%) who grow the food everyone eats.
MBAs making supply chains inherently fragile and over who valued BS things like JIT are just reflecting what is most rewarded in the corpo culture: quick profits are the way to get fat bonuses and stock options in order to bail out when even the slightest hint of head-winds occur. This is just a symptom, not the cause and a reason why US manufacturing will likely take some time before it can get off it's addiction to the garbage made in China.
0: https://www.economicliberties.us/our-work/cheat-to-win-the-j...
Also reflected in what is most rewarded by consumers: lower prices.
No business was ever going to thrive selling US manufactured goods at a significant price premium compared to non US manufactured goods.
It's like they're targeting the lowest common denominator.
It's a self fulfilling prophecy right? If the manufacturing was internal to the US say, theres more jobs hence better economy hence people are able too afford those locally prepared goods.
That probably requires a united front against outsourcing though. It's almost as if globalism breeds poverty, and is just a way for megacorps to milk us of our cash. Totally removed from any kind of social responsibility.
They sure love to change their logos to a rainbow and call that social responsibility though. Like Nike shipping you a keychain of all the micro plastics produced during the manufacturing of those shoes you just bought as if making you deal with their waste is environmental responsibility.
Or it is arbitraging labor prices across different markets and lifting up others. Or it is also arbitraging environmental regulations and taking advantage of more corrupt/inept societies. Or it is also arbitraging better efficiencies in a more appropriately regulated economy, rather than an under or over regulated economy.
Really? Did you post your comment by carrier pigeon?
...besides, maybe they're posting from one of those Raspberry Pi Model Bs that were fabbed in the UK.
That is connected to a router made in China. And the keyboard and display, where were they made? My point is that it is pretty much unachievable and your "wherever possible" is just a get out of jail free card. Also it isn't a particularly laudable aim if we scale it up to the whole of society. We need the various countries in the world to be interdependent, we need China to need to sell to us.
China (aka East Taiwan) makes cheap shit. If you have money you can afford the better manufactured stuff from non tofu-dreg countries.
We need to divulge from China a much as possible and many companies are. It is not ethical to do business with a country that has concentration camps. Hopefully one day the ROC will reclaim power over China and clean all that up.
Obviously paying the premium for Snap-On over harbor freight is worth it, for some people. Harbor Freight still makes the most sense for a huge portion of the market, reducing the market for US made tools.
Whatever the result, it will be visible in what succeeds in the market over the long term.