Despite rising material costs and a blemished image with suppliers, General Motors claims to be on track to acheive its goal to reduce $2 billion from its global procurement costs this year.
This represents about 2% reduction in total spending, an ambitious target, considering GM’s previous cost-cutting initiatives and its current financial woes. And renegotiating supplier agreements now could deflate some of the “synergies” expected from the portended Renault-Nissan-GM alliance. (In a previous post, I challenged the estimated supply cost savings and improvements expected from the deal.)
However, in an interview with Reuters last week, GM procurement chief Bo Anderson suggested that GM is beating the odds: “We are still inside those brackets. We are working hard to offset the rise in raw material prices.”
To its credit, GM has been able to drive additional supply efficiencies and savings through the use of alternative sourcing and supplier management methods. For example: Once a pioneer of price-based reverse auctions and low-cost-country sourcing methods, GM has reassessed global sourcing decisions based on the best landed cost.
Total landed costs incorporate the costs of materials, labor, transportation, tariffs, taxes, handling fees, duties and similar factors. Total costs also assesses how sourcing decisions affect inventory and cash flow. Such factors have dramatic impact on the total cost of a product. A change in government import/export rules or a shift in transportation charges or capacity can dramatically alter the costs and effectiveness of a supply strategy — as well as the profitability of a company.
For example, tariffs on assembled high-tech goods shipped into Brazil can be 2X the cost of the good. However, manufacturers can avoid these tariffs by shipping sub-assemblies into Brazil and doing final assembly in country. As such, leading industrial manufacturers like have begun assessing both the geographical state (e.g., China, Mexico, etc.) and the physical product state (i.e., piece part, sub-assembly, full-assembly, etc.) in order to game the tariff schedules based on their global manufacturing and customer plans. I anticipate that such landed cost optimization and inventory post-ponement strategies will become more popular thanks to globalization, international political uncertainties, and tightening supply markets.
According to the Reuters report, GM now buys 32% of its parts from low-cost countries, such as Mexico, Brazil, Russia, South Korea, China, and Thailand. That’s up 20% from 2002. That may sound impressive, but in North America, labor rules have GM buying 95% of its parts from North American suppliers, with only about 16% of that coming from Mexico. Andersson said he would like to boost supply from Mexico to support the North American market. “Logistically, it’s cheaper because they are so close to us,” he said.
Another strategy GM is using to meet its cost savings goals is to drive parts standardization and reuse across vehicles on a global basis. This would allow sharing of commoditized parts, such as seat frames. According to the article, GM makes 26 versions of seat frames, while white-hot competitor Toyota Motor Corp., makes only two. Reusing common parts and sub-assemblies across vehicles (or products) can not only reduce costs through better volume leverage and simplified supplier management but can also help speed new product development cycles and improve product quality by eliminating variability. Supply Excellence has documented how other manufacturers, such as Harley-Davidson, have used parts standardization and reuse techniques to their advantage.
Whether GM can reach its lofty savings destination is yet to be seen. However, the new approaches the automaker is using on its supply management improvement journey should have long-term benefits for the automaker and its suppliers.

Loading ...
Save to Browser Favorites
Ask
backflip
blinklist
BlogBookmark
Bloglines
BlogMarks
Blogsvine
BUMPzee!
CiteULike
co.mments
Connotea
del.icio.us
DotNetKicks
Digg
diigo
dropjack.com
dzone
Facebook
Fark
Faves
Feed Me Links
Friendsite
folkd.com
Furl
Google
Hugg
Jeqq
Kaboodle
linkaGoGo
LinksMarker
Ma.gnolia
Mister Wong
Mixx
MySpace
MyWeb
Netvouz
Newsvine
PlugIM
popcurrent
Propeller
Reddit
Rojo
Segnalo
Shoutwire
Simpy
sk*rt
Slashdot
Sphere
Sphinn
Spurl.net
Squidoo
StumbleUpon
Technorati
ThisNext
Webride
Windows Live
Yahoo!
Email This to a Friend
If you like this then please subscribe to the 
4 responses so far ↓
1 Supply Excellence » Ford Rumors and Supply Tales // Aug 26, 2006 at 8:08 am
[...] Supply Excellence has closely followed the proposed alliance between General Motors, Nissan, and Renault and the potential benefits it would have for GM’s supply management operations. In previous posts, I assesed the likelihood that these suggested synergies would materialize. I also examined the advanced supply management approaches GM is using to shave an additional $2 billion from its procurement costs this year. [...]
2 Supply Excellence » Will Anyone Buy Detroit? // Oct 9, 2006 at 8:01 am
[...] The news was welcomed by U.S. automotive suppliers who feared any global alliance would bring yet another round of aggressive cost-cutting and supply base rationalization. As noted in previous posts, GM and Ford both announced plans to reduce total supply costs by 2% - 3% this year. However, experts agree that the reprieve will be short-lived. [...]
3 Jagan // Jan 5, 2007 at 6:52 am
If an input could be provided on the payment terms ( when the prices are obtained thro the e-comm route or by Reverse Auctions) it would be great. Did the payment terms / credit as provided by the Suppliers stay the same or was there any alteration
4 Supply Excellence » Is Detroit the Next Global Sourcing Hot Spot? // Jun 12, 2007 at 8:07 am
[...] In fact, GM last year vowed to rethink its global sourcing strategies as part of a broader attempt to overhaul its supply operations, in part because of the success of rival Japanese automakers. [...]
Leave a Comment