I might be able to think of more levels than this. But this seems to cover the basis of the comparison.
1. What are the best materials to use in terms of their properties to make a product. And dependent upon processes, design and engineering the results are not guaranteed to be legitimate.
2. What we have available is this type of metal or material, how much of it do we need to use to make the product conform to required parameters and specifications. And the results may or may not be legitimate.
3. We will use whatever metal we can find and put it in a mold exactly like the product we want to make. And the results are often not legitimate.
Added:
4. We have this surplus or scrap available, what can we make out of it that conforms to number one above. What would this material be best used for? What is this material often sought for the best use of it? And probably this more or less amounts to, who can we market this to? And the results are often not legitimate.
5. And perhaps this, for that subsystem or component, all we can afford to spend is this "" amount of money.
6. And don't forget this one; "Who can we hire to figure this all out for us." Probably the saddest of all?
7. And maybe this, "Just send the product manufacturing ticket to our China partner."
8. And in all of this where is, "Did we ask the customer?" "What feedback have we from our customers on how to make this product better?" Perhaps if your customer is in a supply chain they just want it cheaper? Which means, your customer really isn't the end use customer, hence there is a disassociation. And doesn't that word, "disassociation" describe a lot of what is wrong with our country today?
Something to think about when you buy something.
© 2025 Thomas Paul Murphy
No comments:
Post a Comment