8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
1/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
1
A benchmarking study of the SA auto
component industrys competitivenessrelative to a set of Asian Pacific firms
Firm-level competitiveness findings from the SouthAfrican Automotive Benchmarking Club database
Compiled by Dr Justin Barnes (BA Hons, MSocSci, PhD [Natal])Benchmarking & Manufacturing Analysts SA (Pty) Ltd
7 th October 2005For Ford Motor Company of Southern Africa
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
2/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
2
Report outline1. Introduction: Latest global & SA automotive trends & the
importance of firm-level benchmarking2. Overview of B&M Analysts Market Driver methodology
used for SAABC benchmarks3. Profile of benchmarked South African & Asian Pacific
firms4. Analysis of benchmark findings:
Financial performance Operational competitiveness: Cost control, quality, value
chain flexibility, value chain reliability, human resourcedevelopment, product development
5. Summary of major findings
6. Detailed statistical indicators
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
3/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
3
3. P rofile of benchmarkcomparator groups included
in this report:
SA auto component manufacturers (n=71)versusAsian P acific auto component manufacturers (n=21)
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
4/32
S u m m a r y p r o
f i l e o
f b e n
c h m a r k e
d f i r m s
( 2 0 0 4 )
Trim: 19.0%, Harnesses: 14.3%,Electronics: 14.3%, Foundry/forge: 14.3%,
JIT assembly: 28.6%, Metal form/press:4.8%, Metal fabrication: 23.8%,
Components: 19.0%, Glass: 4.8%, HeatTransfer: 9.5%: Other (paint & rubber):
0.0%
Trim: 15.5%, Harnesses: 7.0%,Electronics: 5.6%, Foundry/forge: 12.7%,JIT assembly: 15.5%, Metal form/press:
15.5%, Metal fabrication: 23.9%,Components: 15.5%, Glass: 4.2%, HeatTransfer: 5.6%: Other (paint & rubber):
5.6%
Sub-sector breakdown
Asian Pacific firms
49.10%
24.67%
6.88%
ISO9001/2: 38.1%, QS9000: 61.9%,ISO14001: 33.3%, ISO/TS: 47.6%
OEM: 76.2%, Aftermarket: 14.3%
Other: 9.5%
8.16
2.11
284.47
030m: 47.1%, 30100m: 23.5%, 100 250m: 5.9%, 250m+: 23.5%
1150: 38.1%, 151250: 14.3%, 251+:47.6%
Local: 61.9%, Multinational: 38.1%
India: 52.4%, Malaysia/Thailand/China:28.6%, Australia: 19.0%
37.07%Imports as purchase %
23.04%Exports as turnover %
62.79%Workforce unionisation
ISO9001/2: 66.2%, QS9000: 45.1%,ISO14001: 42.3%, ISO/TS: 66.2%
Present qualityaccreditations
OEM: 52.1%, Aftermarket: 23.9%,
Other: 23.9%Primary market
8.32Hours per shift
2.01Shifts per day
241.03Operating days/year
0-30m: 8.8%, 30100m: 30.9%, 100-250m: 41.2%, 250m+: 19.1%Turnover (in Rands)
1150: 31.4%, 151250: 22.9%, 251+:45.7%No. of employees
Local: 67.6%, Multinational: 32.4%Ownership
KZN: 32.4%, E. Cape: 36.6%, Gauteng:31.0%Location
South African firmsProfile Indicator
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
5/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
5
Explanation of tables & graphs presented The various tables & graphs presented in this report comprise
the following:
SA firms average (mean) performance for the period 2001 to 2004(wherever longitudinal information is available) SA firms upper quartile performance (meaning the point separating the
top 25% of firms from the rest of the SA dataset) for the period 2001 to
2004 SA firms lower quartile performance (meaning the point separating the
bottom 25% of firms from the rest of the SA dataset) for the period 2001to 2004
Asian Pacific firms average, upper & lower quartile performance for2004
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
6/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
6
4. Value chain benchmarkfindings
Financial performance review Operational competitiveness
Cost Control Quality Value Chain Flexibility Value Chain Reliability Human Resource Development
Product Development Capacity
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
7/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
7
Inflation adjusted turnover trend, indexed in domestic currency to 2001 figures
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
Year
T u r n o v e r
i n d e x
SA 100.00 114.65 122.97 121.27SA upper quartile 100.00 121.74 138.55 146.42
SA lower quartile 100.00 101.41 97.33 102.69
Asia Pacific 100.00 187.39 194.70 233.16
Asia Pacific upper quartile 100.00 136.00 169.52 248.00
Asia Pacific lower quartile 100.00 131.43 128.57 117.75
2001 2002 2003 2004
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
8/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
8
Total employment trend (including contractees on payroll),using an index based on 2001 figures
80
100
120140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
Year
E m p
l o y m e n
t i n d e x
SA 100.00 108.17 115.05 119.77SA upper quartile 100.00 110.91 120.50 119.76
SA lower quartile 100.00 95.94 93.51 92.78
Asia Pacific 100.00 210.18 212.73 238.92
Asia Pacific upper quartile 100.00 232.91 241.16 267.03
Asia Pacific lower quartile 100.00 169.23 160.85 167.11
2001 2002 2003 2004
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
9/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
9
Proportional breakdown of new capital equipment expediture
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
P e r c e n
t
Machinery 80.13 55.90
IT software/hardware 6.41 22.17
Buildings/fixtures 8.55 19.70
Other 5.13 2.29
SA Asia Pacific
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
10/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
10
Operating profit levels as a percentage of total sales
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Year
P e r c e n t
Asia Pacific 9.45
Asia Pacific upper quartile 14.75
Asia Pacific lower quartile 4.40
SA 6.03 7.55 10.09 9.45
SA upper quartile 10.50 11.00 13.90 12.00
SA lower quartile 0.74 3.30 4.90 4.90
2001 2002 2003 2004
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
11/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
11
Total cost of sales breakdown
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
P e r c e n
t
Overhead costs 22.85 22.96
Labour 12.37 13.78
Materials 64.78 63.26
SA firms Asia Pacific firms
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
12/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
12
4.2. OperationalCompetitivenessFindings
The measurements presented in this section are grouped under particularmarket drivers as operational performance & hence measures thereof
should be closely tied to market demands. The sequencing structure of thispart of the report follows the market driver methodology employed. For anyclarification pertaining to the measures used please read the explanations
below each market driver heading
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
13/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
13
Market Driver 1Cost control
The measurement of inventory provides a good proxyfor the measure of cost control at manufacturing
firms. Firms with good inventory control are usuallyin control of their manufacturing costs, with raw
material, work in progress & finished goods stockall contributing directly & indirectly to production
costs. Inventory measures are therefore a criticalpart of comparative benchmarking exercises
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
14/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
14
Total inventory holding levels in operating days
0
5
1015
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
Year
N o .
o f d a y s
Asia Pacific 21.83
Asia Pacific upper quartile 4.06
Asia Pacific lower quartile 33.63
SA 42.61 39.51 36.36 37.83
SA upper quartile 25.25 22.44 18.50 20.24
SA lower quartile 52.20 51.50 47.00 42.75
2001 2002 2003 2004
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
15/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
15
Imports as % of raw materials purchasedAsia Pacific firms37.17% 24.67%SA firms
Raw material inventory holding levels in operating days
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Year
N o .
o f d a y
s
Asia Pacific 13.67
Asia Pacific upper quartile 2.25
Asia Pacific lower quartile 20.13SA 23.26 22.32 19.76 20.50
SA upper quartile 10.00 10.60 8.50 9.40
SA lower quartile 30.08 33.50 27.00 28.35
2001 2002 2003 2004
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
16/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
16
Work in progress inventory holding levels in operating days
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Year
N o .
o f d a y s
Asia Pacific 3.27
Asia Pacific upper quartile 1.00
Asia Pacific lower quartile 5.75
SA 7.10 6.50 7.08 6.92
SA upper quartile 1.75 1.50 1.00 1.42
SA lower quartile 10.10 9.27 7.90 7.55
2001 2002 2003 2004
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
17/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
17
Exports as a % of sales23.04% Asia Pacific firms 6.88%SA firms
Finished goods inventory holding levels in operating days
0
2
4
6
8
1012
14
16
18
Year
N o .
o f d a y s
Asia Pacific 4.89
Asia Pacific upper quartile 0.31
Asia Pacific lower quartile 8.88SA 12.25 10.69 9.52 10.41
SA upper quartile 3.09 3.90 2.00 2.00
SA lower quartile 16.50 13.17 10.05 13.02
2001 2002 2003 2004
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
18/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
18
Market Driver 2Quality
Three quality measures are important to firms: customerreturns, internal defect rates (rejects, reworks, scrap) &
supplier quality. Customer returns reveal customer qualitysatisfaction, but offer insufficient indication of internalquality performance. A firm may have a poor internal
production system, but provide quality products byfollowing stringent checks at the end of its production
process. Quality is thus generated at a cost. Low customerreturn rates need to be complemented by low internaldefect rates & perfect supplier quality. Only then is it
possible to manufacture high quality products at low cost
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
19/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
19
Average automotive customer return rate (0km failures returned by customers)
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
Year
P a r t s p e r m i
l l i o n
Asia Pacific 293
Asia Pacific upper quartile 54
Asia Pacific lower quartile 425
SA 8,064 3,431 1,739 613
SA upper quartile 163 53 35 0
SA lower quartile 2,242 857 701 555
2001 2002 2003 2004
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
20/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
20
Internal reject rate average (goods rejected as a percentage of output)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Year
P e r c e n
t
Asia Pacific 1.29
Asia Pacific upper quartile 0.20
Asia Pacific lower quartile 2.13
SA 3.87 3.98 3.68 3.26
SA upper quartile 0.61 0.60 0.40 0.50
SA lower quartile 5.26 5.19 5.00 4.00
2001 2002 2003 2004
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
21/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
21
Internal scrap rate average (scrap value as a percentage of material costs)
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
Year
P e r c e n t
Asia Pacific 2.24
Asia Pacific upper quartile 0.25
Asia Pacific lower quartile 4.00
SA 1.98 2.21 1.96 1.74
SA upper quartile 0.30 0.50 0.30 0.15
SA lower quartile 2.40 2.95 2.14 2.33
2001 2002 2003 2004
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
22/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
22
Average supplier return rate (0km failures returned to suppliers)
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
Year
P a r t s p e r m
i l l i o n
Asia Pacific 7,658Asia Pacific upper quartile 90
Asia Pacific lower quartile 17,500
SA 16,330 15,152 14,309 11,645
SA upper quartile 1,638 2,692 1,013 518
SA lower quartile 27,250 25,000 20,000 13,119
2001 2002 2003 2004
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
23/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
23
Market Driver 3Value chain flexibility
Value chain flexibility is determined by the speed at which afirm accepts a customer order & converts this to product
delivery. Key variables are the firms logistics system, theefficiency of its suppliers, & the flexibility of its own productionsystem. Given the complexity of associated reliability issuesthese are dealt with separately as Market Driver 4. Here we
are solely interested in the speed with which firms respond to
customer orders, convert material into finished products &pass these pressures on through their supply chain. Keyindicators include customer lead time performance, delivery
frequencies, manufacturing throughput times, productionchangeover capabilities & supplier lead time performance
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
24/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
24
Most recent value chain flexibility indicators
119.3843.7575.6375.00Asia Pacific firms lower quartile(international)
41.2526.2515.007.38Asia Pacific firms upper quartile(international)
37.0030.007.005.00Asia Pacific firms lower quartile (domestic)
7.256.251.000.25Asia Pacific firms upper quartile (domestic)
142.5090.0052.5035.00SA firms lower quartile (international)
62.5040.0022.505.00SA firms upper quartile (international)
44.0030.0014.002.00SA firms lower quartile (domestic)
8.107.001.101.00SA firms upper quartile (domestic)
110.9565.8545.1023.84SA firms (international)
32.7420.6712.072.59SA firms (domestic)
74.0133.3840.6337.13Asia Pacific firms (international)
24.2020.064.142.11Asia Pacific firms (domestic)
d. Value chainflexibility (b+c)
c. Supplierlead times
b. Out ofproduction
a. Out offinished goods
stock
Lead time indicator (measured in days)
Indicator
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
25/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
25
Delivery frequency performance to major customers: 2004
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
SA firms
Asia Pacific firms
Percent
Daily+ Daily Every 2/3 days Weekly Fort-nightly Other
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
26/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
26
Percentage of total production time lost to machine/tool changeovers
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Year
P e r c e n
t
Asia Pacific 3.34Asia Pacific upper quartile 1.00
Asia Pacific lower quartile 2.69
SA 8.03 8.58 8.48 7.86
SA upper quartile 2.48 1.92 4.41 2.40
SA lower quartile 11.46 12.52 11.87 12.84
2001 2002 2003 2004
27
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
27/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
27
Market Driver 5Human resource developmentThe only certainty about auto industry requirements is that they
will become more onerous. Goal posts are shifting & newdemands emerging. Whether firms fail, or grasp the
opportunities afforded by these demands is dependent on theireffective use of resources, with the most important of thesebeing human resources . Unless firms adapt to change, theywill fall behind their competitors, with four dimensions to this:
manpower, machines, materials & methods. Whilst thedimensions are related, the 1 st determines capability to deal
with the others. It is thus important to analyse whether firms are(a) investing in their employees, (b) fostering continuous
improvement programmes & (c) increasing employeeefficiencies
28
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
28/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
28
Basic education levels
99.24%Asia Pacific firms
80.17%SA firmsNumeracy & literacy levels*
* Workers presently at ABET level 3 (equivalent to Grade 4-6) or higher
29
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
29/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
29
Training investment as a percentage of the totalremuneration bill (wages & salaries)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Year
P e r c e n
t
Asia Pacific7.76
Asia Pacific upper quartile 14.25
Asia Pacific lower quartile 1.75
SA 2.06 2.02 1.73 1.95
SA upper quartile 2.54 2.40 2.45 2.90
SA lower quartile 0.87 0.96 1.00 1.00
2001 2002 2003 2004
30
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
30/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
30
Market Driver 6New product development
A key determinant of success for any firm is its abilityto bring new products into the market. Autocomponent manufacturers are no different, although
the new product development process is complexgiven the increasingly dominant role played by 1 stTier MNCs in designing products for OEMs & the
resulting lead source pressures. It is thus important toanalyse new product development performance inrelation to spending (an indication of investment innew products) & time to market (speed of response
to product opportunities)
31
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
31/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
31
Research & Development (R&D) expenditure as a percentage of turnover
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
Year
P e r c e n
t
Asia Pacific firms 2.25Asia Pacific firms upper quartile 4.00
Asia Pacific firms lower quartile 0.00
SA firms 0.95 0.95 0.92 1.01
SA firms upper quartile 1.50 1.30 1.43 1.32
SA firms lower quartile0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2001 2002 2003 2004
32
8/14/2019 Global Competitiveness FORD
32/32
FMCSA Benchmarking Report (2005) www.bmanalysts.com
3
In conclusion It is equally clear that the SA average is pulled down by weak performingfirms. If one focuses on the comparative performance of the upperquartile of SA firms then a different picture emerges. The leading SAfirms perform ahead of the Asian Pacific average & often match the
leading Asian Pacific firms.
Whilst the SA auto components industry needs to improve itscompetitiveness if it is to compete effectively with Asian Pacific firms, thestrong comparative performance of the leading firms is a clear indicationthat this is possible.
Improvements recorded over the period 2001 to 2004 are also indicativeof the progress made by the SA auto components industry (particularly inrespect of quality performance), although the lack of recent investment inboth people & capital is a cause for major concern