This paper examines Toyota's strategic management response to the massive product recall crisis of 2010 and 2011, which severely damaged the brand's reputation for quality and reliability. Drawing on Toyota's annual reports, investor relations documents, and academic sources, the paper evaluates whether the company's current strategies are sufficient to recover lost customer trust. It identifies two key initiatives — the Toyota Global Vision taxonomy and the "Let's Go Places" marketing campaign — and assesses their alignment with Toyota's organizational structure, culture, and control systems. The analysis argues that internal management conflicts, a drift from customer-centric values, and an overemphasis on mass production and cost reduction were root causes of the recall crisis, and that the strategies implemented, while well-intentioned, have yet to fully restore customer loyalty.
Toyota's current strategies, as identified in its annual reports and on its website, will not be enough in the short term to reverse the loss of trust in the company and its brand. There are many factors that contributed to the exceptionally high number of recalls in 2010 — a crisis that continued into February 2011. One of the most significant factors was the exceptional level of political infighting within the company and a lack of focus on customers' needs, as Toyota instead pursued aggressive growth (Shirouzu, 2010). This was further exacerbated by Toyota management concentrating more on cost reduction than on customer satisfaction (Marksberry, 2011) and by the company's reliance on contract quality management and production staff for critical functions (Shirouzu, 2010).
Taken together, these factors highlight a deep internal divide: one faction of managers was placing quality and the customer experience as secondary concerns, while another argued for a lower revenue forecast that would give the automaker greater flexibility and freedom to produce the high-quality vehicles for which it had always been known. As this internal debate continued, customers began leaving for competitive brands including Acura, Hyundai, Honda, and others (Cole, 2011).
The bottom line is that the brand failed to stay aligned with quality as one of its core, foundational values (Dahlgaard-Park, 2011). Toyota moved away from customer-centric values and concentrated instead on the mass production of highly popular automobiles. The much-respected Toyota Way of producing high-quality vehicles gave way to a more mass-produced model that lost the innate value of form, fit, and function — qualities that had become the brand's unique value proposition, combined with its exceptional reliability and stability (Marksberry, 2011).
The recall crisis was an external symptom of a far more systemic problem occurring within Toyota. The divergence in management philosophy led to even wider differences in how to address nascent quality management problems that appeared as early as 2005 and gained momentum in 2009 before becoming very evident during 2010 (Shirouzu, 2010). While Toyota appears to have made peace within itself according to its latest annual report and investor relations documents, its financial statements and other financial metrics continued to show that the trust lost was driving down sales, profits, and customer loyalty (Toyota Investor Relations, 2013).
A review of earlier annual statements supports this contention (Toyota, 2012). The company's vision and philosophy had strayed from its customer-centric focus, and in subsequent annual reports the gap between the stated vision and actual performance became increasingly significant (Toyota, 2012). Those past efforts failed to win back the trust of longtime customers, as evidenced by slowing sales across the company's most popular product lines (Toyota, 2012).
Toyota's most recently updated investor relations site and annual report introduce an entirely new series of strategies aimed at winning back customer trust. These include a renewed emphasis on safe driving and safety technologies, a focus on environmental technology and personal mobility, and — most importantly — a commitment from both Chairman Fujio Cho and President Akio Toyoda to continually pursue a "customer-first" and "genchi genbutsu (onsite, hands-on experience)" mindset and approach to solving the company's fundamental organizational and quality management problems (Toyota Investor Relations, 2013). Both leaders also committed to providing "good quality and affordable price" going forward (Toyota Investor Relations, 2013). The current annual report expands on these key messages and demonstrates the level of investment Toyota is making to follow through on these promises.
Despite all of these efforts, Toyota still had not regained the trust and loyalty of many customers lost during the massive wave of recalls in 2010 and into early 2011. Toyota set records in terms of recall announcements throughout many areas of the auto industry (Cole, 2011). The overall media campaign during 2010 failed to revive auto sales and, in fact, appeared even more questionable amid so many ongoing quality management problems (Piotrowski & Gray, 2010). The current annual report seeks to set a new, more positive tone for the company's future, implying that new initiatives will help redefine its performance (Toyota Investor Relations, 2013). Yet for the majority of longtime Toyota customers, these commitments to create an entirely new culture have yet to be realized. As a result, the accumulated effect of the company's strategies has done little to overcome negative customer perception. Toyota will literally need to revamp its entire product line and provide actual quality data to back up its claims of being an entirely new company.
The first major strategy is the Toyota Global Vision — a taxonomy of twelve different factors that Toyota senior management introduced as part of the brand's global repositioning. The Global Vision combines core components of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) with an internal emphasis on infusing work with autonomy, mastery, and purpose, including long-term employee motivation (Toyota Investor Relations, 2013). Toyota chose to represent this taxonomy as a tree, illustrating the interconnected roots, trunk, and branches of its organizational commitments.
The Toyota Global Vision is specifically designed to win back customers' trust and belief that the brand is viable and will continue to progress toward its broader vision and mission. The Global Vision initiative is consistent with the structure and culture of the company; however, it is not as well aligned with the control-based approach that Toyota has become known for from an engineering perspective (Cole, 2011). As a result, this first initiative — as well-intentioned and well-executed as it is — will most likely not be sufficient to counter the negative press and damaged reputation the company accumulated over time. What customers are looking for is a more focused effort to address the problems inherent in supply chain management, sourcing, production, and — most importantly — the form, fit, and function of the vehicles being produced. The Global Vision initiative, despite its inclusiveness, fails to adequately demonstrate to customers what specific, significant changes are occurring within the company.
"Digital marketing campaign and its organizational alignment"
Despite all of these efforts, Toyota still has not regained the trust and loyalty of many customers it lost during the massive number of recalls in 2010 and into the first months of 2011. The accumulated value of both strategies — the Toyota Global Vision and the "Let's Go Places" campaign — has done little to overcome deeply embedded negative customer perceptions. While each initiative is reasonably well aligned with Toyota's organizational structure and culture, neither directly confronts the core quality and supply chain failures that caused the crisis in the first place.
You’re 71% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.