|
|
|
|
|
by margalabargala
274 days ago
|
|
Okay, granted, but is that applicable on the timescales here? There has been a very steady march of progress in cars, in safety, efficiency, and comfort since that ad came out. They did lose their tech lead, but I'm not sure it was inevitable in that time frame. Volvo made a name for itself with safety. Mercedes could have done that. Toyota made a name for itself with hybrid drivetrains. Mercedes could have done that. They didn't, sure, but your argument seems to hinge on low hanging fruit going away and others catching up. This seems like Mercedes simply opted not to reach for the next piece of fruit. |
|
I would also argue that efficiency is insufficient, at least in the US. For Toyota, while their hybrid tech is an incredible engineering accomplishment and certainly put them on the radar for many consumers, I don't know that it's the crown jewel; to wit, they started offering their hybrid tech royalty free a few years ago. If you want an efficient car, you can get one from a number of marques, but is there real demand for that?
You're right I think to call out Toyota as a counterexample, but I think it's the Toyota Way that truly distinguished Toyota and continues to do so. That seems to be the only hedge against decay, to bake a lasting, long-termism culture into the organization in day one and ruthlessly enforce it. There's a few other Japanese companies that come to mind that have similar storylines. It needs to be there in the beginning too, TPS isn't a secret, and JV attempts to share the knowledge (NUMMI) didn't seem to make a lasting impact without the culture to enforce it long-term.