P
I think that quality has a role in helping to address these business problems.
The poster's organization is having problems with cash flow, credit holds and unreliable suppliers, all issues which, properly addressed, will surely improve its OTD performance.
You're right that benchmark data, if it exists (probably doesn't) will almost certainly be unreliable - unless the organization is in the telecom supply chain and able to access (audited) TL 9000 OTD measurements (more at http://questforum.org/ - but not a cheap option). Problems like these are amongst the reasons that QuEST Forum created TL 9000 (ISO 9001 for the telecom supply chain) and mandated audited, benchmarkable records of OTD performance. It continues to surprise me that those at the top of the food chain in other sectors don't copy its example.
Without proper leadership this is a very hard problem to address successfully - I've failed more often than succeeded over the last several decades, mostly because sales managers are usually driven by commission on closing a sale. A very few organizations give them something like half commission on closing the sale, the other half on customer acceptance of the product: these are easier to deal with.
Either way the business needs to consider: anyone can make a sale by making false promises. But repeat business is harder to win when the promise is broken, and costs more in terms of discounts, management time, delayed payments, penalty clauses, freebies, etc. The question is: will the business (and its sales people and their commissions) do better in the long term if it simply meets its commitments? Of course the answer is yes, but it takes a leap of faith at top management level to make it so.
When I was with a small IT consultancy business we regularly faced competition that over-promised and under-delivered. We built bespoke systems for specific customer requirements. Our sales strategy was to establish a relationship of mutual trust and respect with our customers. We had reference customers who would say, "Yes, they're on-time with decent quality." We showed prospects our (sanitized) planning metrics to demonstrate that our delivery schedules were realistic - and our competitors were not. This worked often enough to keep us in business - and sometimes, lost bids would come back to us after the competitor who won with an unrealistic promise failed.
I think the original poster needs first to work on the cash flow and supplier management problems, because those are undoubtedly causing delivery delays their competitors may not be suffering. (If it were me, I'd be considering looking for another job. Cash flow problems and credit holds are not a good indicator of future employment.)
Hope this helps,
Pat
The poster's organization is having problems with cash flow, credit holds and unreliable suppliers, all issues which, properly addressed, will surely improve its OTD performance.
You're right that benchmark data, if it exists (probably doesn't) will almost certainly be unreliable - unless the organization is in the telecom supply chain and able to access (audited) TL 9000 OTD measurements (more at http://questforum.org/ - but not a cheap option). Problems like these are amongst the reasons that QuEST Forum created TL 9000 (ISO 9001 for the telecom supply chain) and mandated audited, benchmarkable records of OTD performance. It continues to surprise me that those at the top of the food chain in other sectors don't copy its example.
Without proper leadership this is a very hard problem to address successfully - I've failed more often than succeeded over the last several decades, mostly because sales managers are usually driven by commission on closing a sale. A very few organizations give them something like half commission on closing the sale, the other half on customer acceptance of the product: these are easier to deal with.
Either way the business needs to consider: anyone can make a sale by making false promises. But repeat business is harder to win when the promise is broken, and costs more in terms of discounts, management time, delayed payments, penalty clauses, freebies, etc. The question is: will the business (and its sales people and their commissions) do better in the long term if it simply meets its commitments? Of course the answer is yes, but it takes a leap of faith at top management level to make it so.
When I was with a small IT consultancy business we regularly faced competition that over-promised and under-delivered. We built bespoke systems for specific customer requirements. Our sales strategy was to establish a relationship of mutual trust and respect with our customers. We had reference customers who would say, "Yes, they're on-time with decent quality." We showed prospects our (sanitized) planning metrics to demonstrate that our delivery schedules were realistic - and our competitors were not. This worked often enough to keep us in business - and sometimes, lost bids would come back to us after the competitor who won with an unrealistic promise failed.
I think the original poster needs first to work on the cash flow and supplier management problems, because those are undoubtedly causing delivery delays their competitors may not be suffering. (If it were me, I'd be considering looking for another job. Cash flow problems and credit holds are not a good indicator of future employment.)
Hope this helps,
Pat
