|
|
|
10/21/2011 12:51 PM
|
|
|
I understand from the resources on this site that the birth of Lean in Japan started with Toyota, though the Lean thread started somewhere in Ford and other US companies. However we notice that Japanese designs of cars ,and other products, were small and compact, while American products had the 'big is better' philosophy. What prompted the Japanese to redesign cars to be more compact ? Is there an overlap between this 'small is beautiful' design of Japanese products and Lean ?
|
|
|
|
|
10/21/2011 02:38 PM
|
|
|
If you ever get the opportunity to go to Japan, take a good look around. A good portion of the answer you are looking for is there.
|
|
|
|
|
10/22/2011 04:22 PM
|
|
|
Maybe thing in Japan are smaller because Japan has 41% of American Population, but only 3.9% of land area (Japan has roughly the same land area as Montana).
|
|
|
|
|
10/28/2011 01:09 PM
|
|
|
With respect to cars, they have historically been smaller in Japan for the same reason as in Europe - there was no domestic oil industry. In the US, the oil industry existed before the automobile industry and oil was a very inexpensive commodity from mostly domestic sources. Before 1973, the market for small, fuel efficient cars was limited. In Japan and Europe, oil had to be imported at greater expense and with negative effects on the balance of trade. The result was high fuel taxes and a strong incentive to produce small cars.
Even in the modern economy you can see the residual effect of this in fuel prices. It is cheaper in places that have an oil industry, such as the US, Mexico, Venezuela, Russia, parts of the Middle East, and Indonesia.
|
|
|
|
|
10/28/2011 01:09 PM
|
|
|
Hi
I think its due to the space constrain Japanese always had (have). That could be the reason why Japan focus on smaal is beautiful paradigm.
|
|
|
|
|
10/28/2011 01:09 PM
|
|
|
Small is beautiful but...
I think that the small cars were a response to customer demand. With gas at 2 or 3 times that of the US and less disposable income, an inexpensive car with good fuel economy is what the Japanese people could or would buy.
Also note that Japanese vehicle registration and license fees are scaled to the size of the engine - the bigger the car, the more tax you pay. Another incentive to be small.
|
|
|
|
|
10/28/2011 01:09 PM
|
|
|
One more observation...
InNorth America the Japanese sell lots of SUV's and trucks, many of which lag their American competitors in fuel economy.
Toyota did not build small cars in response to some sense of ecology; they build what the customers want and which comply with the law: small cars in Japan and Europe; big cars in US, Canada, and Mexico.
|
|
|
|
|
10/31/2011 10:21 AM
|
|
|
It comes down to space limitations. Japan as with many highly populated countries, whose cities where built before the dawn of the car, they cannot handle large vehicles. Same holds for home, land cost are so high that space is a premium, thus anything they buy has to fit into those limitations. In North America land was in many areas relatively cheap, thus we could use more of it and give ourselves more space.
Second distance traveled, tends to be far greater in North America, than virtually anyplace else in the world, take a good look at both Canada and the United States. We commonly make trips that total hundreds of miles. We own a civic and a Saturn Vue, which one do you think does all the really long drives, after all I am 6'5" tall.
If you have ever noticed Canada and the USA have a taller average height than all but a handful of countries, and unlike most of them we have a need to travel greater distances. Because we tend to be larger in size we also tend to want to have more room. Could be why I hate to travel tourist on any plane if I have to be on it for more than a couple hours, I feel like a sardine in a can the whole time.
Yes there are some idiots who buy something four times bigger than what they really need, but for many of us we buy the products that fit us best, so in North America they will naturally be larger than in other countries.
Robert Drescher
ELSE Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
11/01/2011 07:35 PM
|
|
|
Interesting answers! Might another view be that the US is totally indifferent, unaware and unconcerned about waste of any kind? If the Japanese environmental situation has led to small and lean, then pehaps the converse applies: the US environmental abundance has led to waste of all resources.
|
|
|
|
|
11/03/2011 12:26 PM
|
|
|
Kevin,
I think it's important to note that small is not always lean and not all Japanese companies are lean either. The "small" part in Japan is largely driven by environmental conditions there. The "lean" part can be driven by competitive conditions. But not all companies feel the same pressure.
Tom
|
|
|
|
|
11/04/2011 11:02 AM
|
|
|
Yes Tom, I agree. And I keep thinking that waste is waste. So following this thought, a 'fat' organisation, that is not driven to be lean because it does need to, is still fat and wasteful, even if the resources it is wasting are 'cheap' and plentiful. It may be very profitable and have a competitive edge, yet, has it not the opportunity to reduce waste and perform better? It seems to me that the leaner one becomes, the smaller one will tend to be, relatively, anyway, as one will get more throughput for any given level of resources or one will need less resources. This might lead to a general view that, while small is not necessarily lean, lean tends to be smaller. Does the same apply to products? I suspect probably so, as this will result in less material usage and a smaller product footprint. Also, in lean thinking we keep reminding ourselves that we must look at the whole value stream, the end-to-end process. I guess this really includes the full lifecyle of the product, in which case the product size and impact would be considerations.
So back to the orignal questions, "Is there an overlap between this 'small is beautiful' design of Japanese products and Lean ?" I think ,"maybe"..................
|
|
|
|
>
Community >
Forums
Send to a Friend
