Reseavcl.1 Institute Rb I ------I
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Auto-in-Michigan Project - 3. ... I FY 1987 Final Report The AIM Project fulfilled its mandated objectives in fiscal 1987. This report restates those objectives, summarizes Project activities; in support of them, and assesses the impact of those activities. Since AIM project management in FY 1987 was split between the Industrial Technology Institute (ITI, subcontractor) and the University of Michigan's Office for the Study of Automotive Transportation (OSAT, contractor), an expenditures statement is not attached; it will be provided under separate cover by the University's Accounting Department. Goals and Objectives AIM'S goal in FY 1987 was to deepen our, and hence State government's, knowledge of major Big Three and independent supplier plants in the state. FY 1987 was; in a sense, the year in which the Project set out to test FY 1985-86 predictions against the concrete reality of plant leadership's perceptions of their competitive and technological contexts. Hence, supporting the Renew program (see Activities, below) of the Michigan Department of Commerce (MDC) was AIM'S major focus until April 1987, after which plant access problems forced t.he negotiation of a revised workplan (see below) placing more emphasis on independent suppliers' sourcing opportunities. Activities The MDC's Renew program was an ambitious effort to send MDC account executives out to Michigan Big Three plants and the largest (by employment size) independent parts suppliers. At each site, an AIM-designed questionnaire protocol was to be used in interviews with management and local union leaders. Each such visitation was to be chronicleti by the logging of a three-part (summary, management, union) Renew trip report on the MTS Confer system. Once logged, AIM staff were given five working days to file comments. On an occasional ba5is, as determined by Renew leadership, AIM participants were to prepare for MDC-Renew detailed memoranda summarizing the implications of the findings and commentsries; AIM members' responsibilities were divided by plant type. Forty-five (45) Renew visitations were logged, and a set of six AIM memoranda prepared for h4DGRenew. Attachment 1 presents a list of Renew visitations, the questionnaire used zs an interview guide by MDC account executives at Renew visits, and the set of six ,AIM memoranda (including a cover memo transmitting =----------- -Transportation Reseavcl.1 institute rB i ---------I-----.. .>--- ---. them to MDC-Renew). Three newsletters, volume 2 numbers 1-3, were produced during FY 1987. Distribution was widened, as proposed in the AIM FY 1987 grant, to include more State government "drop points" and an expanded direct mail subscriber list that now numbers 500 and includes all plant managers and local union presidents in Michigan automotive facilities with 500 or more employees. Volume 2 number 3 includes an article summarizing the University of Michigan's study of the impact on the Michigan economy of the announced GM plant closures; AIM staff provided the detailed assumptions and supplier information needed for the University's projections. Attachment 2 is a set of the three FY 1987 (volume 2) nevsletters. Serious problems of access to GM plants began to be encountered early in calendar 1987. This was particularly unfortunate in light of the State's increasing concern over, and interactions with, GM in the context of the impending plant closures. As a result, a revised workplan was negotiated, and beginning in April 1987 the Project's activity focus changed from service to MDC-Renew to a set of activities that are the core of AIM'S work in FY 1988. Attachment 3 presents three documents that, together, explain the reorientation. The first is the letter requesting State approval for the workplan revision; the second is a letter to the AIM Advisory Board explaining the reorientation; 'and the third is a copy of the now-approved. AIM FY 1988 project proposal, which explains in more detail each of the subprojec.ts that together compose the reoriented AIM mission. Ironically, just as the reorientation became official, GM -- while remaining adamantly opposed tc open MDC-Renew access to its Michigan plants -- began making increasing requests of MDC and GOJT for training assistance. AIM staff, pursuant to a request by the MDC's Auto Policy Group, was commissioned to produce a model of GM in the State economy, one that could be used to guide, and predict results of, State assistance efforts to GM facilities. The model, with supporting materials on each of GM's 58 Michigan production facilities, is Attachment 4. The AIM slide show was expznded to cover the topics contained in the three issues of volume 2 of the newsletter; a total of 23 new slides were added, and 11 pre-FY 1987 slides were updated. Complete sets of the slides are in the possession of the University's Industrial Development Division, the Michigan Modernization Service's Research and Analysis Program, and ITI's Industry Affairs and Policy group. -------*-. -------*-. .., -. - i Iransportalian i, Slssearch 1~1s"rituts i An AIM advisory board meeting- .i . +. and dinner was held in September 1987. Attachment 5 includes the letter sent to speakers, and a copy of an example of the type of sourcing information that AIM staff is now busy collecting. Project communications were managed on the MTS Confer system. Twenty-nine permanent items and 452 messages were logged during FY 1987. CPU and connect time charges were approximately $2300. AIM'S Impact AIM Project members Andrea, Baum, Flynn, Luria, and Russell between them made thirteen (13) AIM-related presentations around the State in FY 1987, using the expanded Project slide show. Tal'ks were given in Detroit, Southfield, Novi, Grand Rapids, Lansing, Kalamazoo, Ann Arbor, and Traverse City to local development groups, technology councils, supplier forums, and community college educators. Newsletter distribution is covered above under Activities. AIM staff also received and answered 13 letters from Michigan auto suppliers asking for more detailed information pursuant to newsletter articles. AIM staff attended three meetings of the MDC's Auto Policy Group during FY 1987, and responded to 54 telephone inquiries from MDC staff. Expenditures This information will be provided under separate cover by the University's Accounting Department. ATTACHMENT 1 AJM AND RIENEW o Renew Visitation Log o AN1 Protocols for Renew Visits a AIM Meomoranda to MDC-Renew . Renew Visitation Summary Despite access problems at GM, IvEchigan Department of Commerce account executives made 45 visitations under the Renew program in FY 1987, following the procedures set up for AIM-Renew work: r Renew visit, using AIM protocol r Renew trip report -- summary sheet, management report, and union report -- logged r AIM commentaries logged within five (5) working days Between October 1, 1986 and September 30, 11387, visits were made to: 1. GM CPC Pontiac Engine 2. GM CPC Bay City (included AIM briefing on cainshaft technology and competitors) 3. GM Inland Livonia (AIM staff were ailso involved in early warnings on movement of work from Livonia and Tecumseh plants to Euclid and Grand Rapids facilities) 4. GM CFD Saginaw (3 plants), including All? participation in an Auto Policy Group meeting on CFD issues 5. Ford Wayne Assembly 6. Ford Monroe Stamping 7. Ford T&C Livonia 8. Ford PPD Milan 9. Ford CCD Plymouth 10. Chrysler Sterling Heights Assembly (Renew was able to procure for ATM detailed parts sourcing lists) 11. Chrysler Acustar Detroit kyle 12. Chrysler Acustar MWield Foundry 13. Chrysler Acustar Detroit. Forge 14. Chrysler Acustar Detroit Trim 15.-Chrysler Acustar Trenton Chemical 16. Chrysler Eagle Jeep Toledo 17. Active (Elkton) 18. Autodie (Grand Rapids) 19. Borg Warner (Sterling Heights) 20. Checker (Kalamazoo) . 31. Cross (Fraser) 22. Dana (Detroit) 23. GenCorp, Diversitech (Ionia) 24. Donnelly (Holland) 25. Eaton (Marshall) 26. Emhart (Warren) 27. Harvard [was Hayes-Albion] (Jackson) 28. I<elsejr-Hayes (Detroit,) 29. Icelsey-Hayes (Romulus) 30. [F. Joseph] Lamb Technicon (Warren) 31. Lear Siegler, General Seating (Detroit) 32, Lear Siegler, General- Seating (Mendon) 33. Lobdell-Emery (Alma) 34. Monsanto (Trenton) 35, Motor Wheel (Lansing) 36. Motor Wheel (Ypsilanti) 37. Prince (Holland) 38. Riverside Metal Products (Port Huron) 39. Roberts (Grand Ledge) 40. Sealed Power (Dowagiac) 41. Sterling Engineered Products (bit. Clemens) 42. Tecumseh Products (Tecumseh) - as part of a TDS-led team, AIM staff also worked with management and local unison personnel in State effort to win investment commitment 43. Walbro (Cass City) Name, lccatlon, number of employees, SIC codes, etc. (Essentially what Is a l ready captured through the Cl lent F l le Lead/Prospect form. Thls shou Id include the reporting relationship of the plant manager, 1 1) c ore-, dest lnal'lon (customers and spec 1 f lc plants) and volume (Including what percent of the total product llne sales), I 2 %-!or wetltnrc. Who are your major cornpet ltors? Where are they locnted? What are thelr strengths and weaknesses? 3) associated wlth these product llnes over the next several years (e.g,, czarburetors replaced by fuel InJectlon, body panels golrlg plastic, vehicle programs terminating, etc. 4 1 ucts thev ewtto bl~bover the next several years (Including non-OEM work) and what their competltlve advantages/d l sadvantages are re1at l ve to those new markets, 1) Supollers of key lwantithe volume of each. How much of their supply base Is located in Mlchlgan? U.S.? Off shore? 2) mthsand