Has Toyota Returned to the right path

[gcdugas]

Isn’t the problem with the machinery though and not the driver? No doubt Button and Trulli could easily start to perform at a higher level given the machinery. It seems the weak link in both these teams is the management mentality. The resources, budgets and individual people are more than up to the job.

The question is do they want to keep hammering at F1 like a it’s a normal corporate business, or treat as the enigma it is?

I agree that this is also a component to the question of "the right path" and I asked it previously in a poat:

But back to Toyota, and drawing an interesting contrast to the Red Bull team, do you think that Toyota are possibly shedding some of their corporate committee management style to a more autonomous individual style? I know Dernie and Gillan that you mentioned are both self styled types who need to be freed to pursue their instincts. Just look at Red Bull once the Ford corporate hacks were excised.

You will note that I also wondered about the working environment that Dernie and Gillan naturally seek. Could this be evidence or are they just hardcore F1 junkies that love to be in F1 so much that they are willing to work under less than ideal conditions for them? I think the answer to that is : "No", so there must be some changes to the usual Toyota structure. Just how deep these run I don't know.

BTW, the user vasia has only one post and has not answered the question as to how or why he contends that Gascoyne wanted an extra light V-8 that has hindered Toyota (Williams hasn't complained about it). Nor has he sought to give any anecdotal statements that align with the main thrust of his assertions. I do not take issue with his contention except for the "light V-8" part.

Gascoyne seems to be very able to secure work so his technical reputation within the very close fraternity of F1 must be OK, but probably just OK. To me the last thing he can list as an accomplishment was the 1999 Jordan. However, in his defense, I read that his departure from Toyota was more or less to serve as a sacrificial scalp for Toyota's industrial espionage woes with Ferrari, something he has absolutely nothing to do with since it pre-dated his tenure. Nevertheless, I think Gascoyne is overrated. His tenure at Renault contributed nothing earth shattering compared to his championship winning successor Bob Bell. Whatever the case, he did not leave a hole at Toyota when he left. And what designer has left a whole? Mac seem OK or better without Newey, even the great Byrne has groomed his successor at Ferrari so that he will not leave a void. This is a side benefit of the much maligned redundant structure. Still, intuitive mavericks need lots of latitude to operate at their highest level.

[Project Four]

Isn’t the problem with the machinery though and not the driver? No doubt Button and Trulli could easily start to perform at a higher level given the machinery. It seems the weak link in both these teams is the management mentality. The resources, budgets and individual people are more than up to the job.

The question is do they want to keep hammering at F1 like a it’s a normal corporate business, or treat as the enigma it is?

It has always fascinated me, why some teams continue to win in F1 whereas others struggle or why some teams are only able to run at the front for one year and then the year after struggle.

Scrabs you raise as very good point that a lot of the teams have top class drivers, highly talented human resources, resources to design, build and develop F1 cars and also vast budgets. So what is holding these teams back and what is Ferrari doing different, and I do think that you must hold Ferrari up as the benchmark team.

Scarbs, do you want to elaborate on what you perceive as the management mentality problems at Toyota and at Honda, and what Ferrari and to some degree Mclaren are doing right / differently to get and sustain winning.

Also, while I agree you must be a racer to be successful, in F1, and that this maybe some of the problems at Toyota and at Honda, what is going on at Williams.

[WhiteBlue]

My view is that the Japanese F1 teams cannot amalgamate the resources at home and the technology in Europe by an entrepreneurial management.

BMW have managed to integrate their Munich projects with the Swiss team proficiencies and show a unified face and brand image.

That isn't true for Honda. They havn't found someone who integrates all their strengthes (a Japanese person) and get on with the business.

Same is true for Toyota. Perhaps they eventually will find that unique person which is 110 % dedicated to motorsport and will integrate the European workforce with the Japanese identity.

That will never happen if the guys are on the job just for 5 years though. Five years as an F1 team principal just gets you immersed but you will never be able to unlock your potential.

[donskar]

I touched on the Japanese management style topic several days ago. Having had academic and real-life experience with Japanese management, I have these observations:

Management is as much as possible by consensus. Responsibility, blame and reward are shared. Obvious benefits, but designs are usually not so cutting edge, because they often result from lowest common denominator, conservative approach. The bleeding edge thinker (think Colin Chapman, John Barnard Zora Arkus-Duntov) is neither welcomed nor encouraged. Group think produces GOOD products, because the thinkers are all very solid. However, GREAT products are less often seen. (Think Camry: great in many ways, but not groundbreaking in any way.)

Decision making takes longer, though execution is excellent. In F1, decisions need to be faster, and execution just as good.

The qualities that lead to greatness in mass-produced goods are anathema to great specialized products like F1 cars.

One last point: the Japanese model is success through focus. Honda focuses on producing great engines, and they HAVE built some of the best F1 engines ever. Toyota focuses on large quantities of high quality mass market products. (Just a coincidence that their greatest competition successes were "sort of" based on production cars: Celicas in rallying, Camrys in NASCAR?) An analogy: I'll bet the welds on Toyota's F1 car are immaculate, but heavy.

To bring in Ferrari: There is total, unwavering focus there: RACE AND WIN.

Ferrari (like Lotus and Cooper and Minardi and Abarth in the past) is driven by PASSION, not just data and committees. And, post-Enzo, they have built a human machine, self-reproducing, that seamlessly goes from generation to generation without missing a beat. They have (nearly) perfected a self-contained ecosystem that has one goal: WIN. They have gotten so near perfection that not even ego plays a large role anymore. (There are aberrations of course - Stepney.) What the Japanese try to instutionalize through education and culture, Ferrari has somehow established by carefully building a team who share a common passion: WIN.

Here comes the boss . . .

[guy_smiley]

This topic is why Honda hired Ross Brawn. As donskar pointed out, he hasn't had much effect yet but that's natural--it will be in the years to come that Ross will make the difference. But Brawn's hiring wasn't one sided. I think he specifically went with Honda to help them rebuild and get back to the front of the grid--it's his little project. Of course it takes more than one man, but I think we will see Honda improve in the future, especially considering the 2009 rule changes and Honda's immense budget--same goes for Toyota.

And to answer the question in the topic heading, yes I think Toyota are on the right path and I think they'll finish 4th behind Ferrari, BMW and McLaren. They've been able to develop their car very rapidly (sadly at the expense of Williams, of whom I'm a dear fan).

[Project Four]

While I agree with donskar,

Management is as much as possible by consensus. Responsibility, blame and reward are shared. Obvious benefits, but designs are usually not so cutting edge, because they often result from lowest common denominator, conservative approach.

Decision making takes longer, though execution is excellent. In F1, decisions need to be faster, and execution just as good.

The qualities that lead to greatness in mass-produced goods are anathema to great specialized products like F1 cars.

Do the Japanese teams really operate the same way as the their manufacturing arms ?, and in someway Toyota product development process is held up within the automotive sector with its ability to develop new products rapidly, to high quality and with minimal implementation problems as the way everyone should develop their products. And to some degree they are being copied and not just by other auto companies, aerospace are also copying their development process.

I do think that success in F1, and I must say Ferrari’s success, is down to some think more than just a passion and a focus on RACE TO WIN. Toyota and Honda must have this same passion, as do Williams, Red Bull, Renault and they are all to some degree not front running teams.

However, passion and a will to win may be part of it. You can relate to stories of Schumacher on holiday and ringing the test team at 2 in the morning and asking about the test or getting them to try different bits or the story when Lance Armstrong was rung on Christmas day by another top cyclist until to find that he was out training, the top cyclist realised that he had already lost the Tour de France.

Lastly, it took a team of talent people (Brawn, Todt, Schumacher, etc) to turn Ferrari around and they have left something in place that continues evolve and to deliver success,

[gcdugas]

That will never happen if the guys are on the job just for 5 years though. Five years as an F1 team principal just gets you immersed but you will never be able to unlock your potential.

Dave Richards had been around Beneton but he had quite an impact in only two years. How did he do it? I suggest they simply go back to what, and who got them results.

This topic is why Honda hired Ross Brawn. As donskar pointed out, he hasn't had much effect yet but that's natural--it will be in the years to come that Ross will make the difference.....

Do you think they regret firing Dave Richards? If so, then why is Nick Fry still around? Fry has done nothing with everything Richards left him. In my opinion, Fry is the worst team principal on the grid by a long margin. Brawn will need more able top management like Todt or Dennis. The principal allocates resources, budgets, time, and has a big picture vision for seasons to come and internal structure. He sets the tone. The first thing Richards did was to dump JV when his contract was up even though he was the core of the team because he rightly perceived him as an overpaid drain upon the team who was "past his sell by date".

[f1italia]

I think Toyota will be a better team next year. They are on the right track but they still need a lot of work and they need a superstar driver.

I think with all the changes the FIA does every year makes it hard on these teams to gain any ground. Maybe if they stuck with a program for a couple years instead of changing every year maybe you will see some other teams up front.

I like the Japanese teams and I miss Super Aguri.

[guy_smiley]

Do you think they regret firing Dave Richards?

As Kimi always says, there's no point in worrying about the past. Richards has moved on and Honda have Brawn now so let's see where it goes next year.

Personally, I have no opinion about Richards and Fry--I only said that I think Brawn will help Honda. It's pretty simple really.