The problems of success
I visited a couple of companies recently in Germany that supply some of our major (and smaller) crane manufacturers. With demand for new cranes finally booming once again, thanks particularly to demand in China, the Middle East and the USA, these suppliers are faced with the kind of problem that could only have dreamt about a couple of years ago. Put simply, there is too much demand for their products and services.
Crane manufacturers also are finding it hard to satisfy their customers, who want their new crane this week and not in nine months’ time. But at least for (most of) them, they have a wide range and large number of clients. Some of their suppliers, on the other hand, often depend on maybe half a dozen key customers.
I am not talking about suppliers such Cummins, Michelin or Goodyear, that are big enough to look after themselves – and are indeed bigger than any crane manufacturer. I am talking about the small specialist that depends, perhaps completely, on crane manufacturers.
One such small company I visited is finding that, after some relatively lean years, it is now simply unable to keep up with the demands placed upon it by the crane manufacturers. At the start of the year, its order book was encouragingly healthy and it was able to schedule its workload accordingly. Since then, however, the purchasing departments of crane manufacturers keep calling to increase their orders and wanting to shorten the previously agreed delivery times. (It was no surprise to hear the company’s product was in such demand, since it is clearly a good one.)
Like all well-run companies, this supplier works hard to maintain good relations with its customers and generally succeeds. However, its increasing inability to keep pace with the demands of its customers is threatening to create strains in these relationships.
To keep pace with these demands, this company has begun outsourcing more work. The result is that despite experiencing a dramatic increase in turnover, its profitability has declined, which is perhaps not what you would expect to be happening to suppliers in the current climate.
In a bid to meet the demand it is now experiencing, it has purchased new land and is planning an extension to its workshop, which for a company of its size is a significant commitment. However, it will be a year or two before it is able to reap the benefits of this. Meanwhile, its production will inevitably be disrupted by the reorganisation involved in this expansion.
The obvious danger is that as soon as the enlarged workshop is up and running, the market falls back again.
I make a small plea, therefore, to crane manufacturers. Yes, continue to put your customers first. They must be number one. But please also understand that the pressure that is now being experienced by your production lines is also being experienced by your suppliers.
Vague assumptions
In the August issue I shared a quote offered by Terex Demag’s Klaus Meissner on the nature of crane design and designers. He ended his excellent presentation at the Crane Safety and Management conference in Amsterdam earlier this year with this: “Crane design is a science of vague assumptions, based on debatable figures, from inconclusive calculations, constructed from materials with dubious traceability, tested with equipment of problematical accuracy, by persons of doubtful reliability and of questionable mentality.”
My thanks to Bruce Coatta of Earls Spreaders in Canada, who has responded thus:
“Air Force Explosive Ordnance Disposal technicians are responsible for the safe disarming of any explosive device that threatens members of the US Armed Forces. Their primary function is to remove, disarm, or detonate in place any explosive materials in a safe manner.
“The possible fatal hazards of the job do not appear to daunt EOD technicians in the least. In fact, they seem to enjoy the danger of their occupation. This may explain why the first paragraph of the Air Force EOD training manual reads: ‘EOD is a science of vague assumptions, based on debatable data, taken from inconclusive experiments, with instruments of problematic accuracy, by persons of questionable mentality.’ ”
It seems that crane designers and bomb disposal experts are not the only professions to lay claim having questionable mentality, however. Here’s this, from the magazine of the USA’s Institute of Electrical & Electronic Engineers:
“A programmer is a person who passes as an exacting expert on the basis of being able to turn out, after innumerable punching, an infinite series of incomprehensive answers calculated with micrometric precisions from vague assumptions based on debatable figures taken from inconclusive documents and carried out on instruments of problematical accuracy by persons of dubious reliability and questionable mentality for the avowed purpose of annoying and confounding a hopelessly defenseless department that was unfortunate enough to ask for the information in the first place.”
