2025 WRI Results: Toyota Soars, Honda and GM Improve, Others Decline

[Transcript]

[00:00:00] Jan Griffiths: Welcome to the Automotive Leaders Podcast, where we help you prepare for the future by sharing stories, insights, and skills from leading voices in the automotive world with a mission to transform this industry together.

I'm your host, Jan Griffiths, that passionate, rebellious farmer's daughter from Wales with over 35 years of experience in our beloved auto industry and a commitment to empowering fellow leaders to be their best authentic selves.

Stay true to yourself, be you, and lead with Gravitas, the hallmark of authentic leadership. Let's dive in.

This episode is brought to you by Lockton. Lockton redefines business insurance and people solutions with a personal touch. Their global team of 11,000 is driven by independence, not quarters to tailor success for your business.

Discover the Lockton difference, where your goals become their mission. Independence it's not just how you think, but how you act.

And here we are, it is Season Six of the Automotive Leaders Podcast, and what an episode we have for you today to launch Season Six. We are going to be diving deep into the Plante Moran WRI Study 2025. Yes, the Working Relations Index.

What exactly do the suppliers think of the OEMs, and what do they need to do to improve? And our stellar panel lineup today is Sig Huber, Chief Commercial Officer at Elm Analytics. Sig has a deep background in supplier relations, both at Toyota and Stellantis. Sig, welcome back.

[00:02:12] Sig Huber: Thank you very much. It's great to be here.

[00:02:15] Jan Griffiths: Dave Andrea, Principal at Plante Moran, and the owner of the WRI. Dave, welcome back.

[00:02:23] Dave Andrea: Thank you so much, Jan. Glad to kick off Season Six with you.

[00:02:27] Jan Griffiths: And Dr. Angela Johnson. Angela has an extensive career with General Motors, and is now a Principal at Plante Moran, and the new owner of the WRI. Welcome, Angela.

[00:02:41] Angela Johnson: Thank you very much. I'm excited to be joining.

[00:02:44] Jan Griffiths: Let's get into it. Dave Andrea, what have we got? What do the results look like for the WRI 2025?

[00:02:52] Dave Andrea: Well, we saw actually that the widest gap between the highest rated vehicle manufacturer and the lowest vehicle manufacturer. So, there was a gap of 245 points. That was the largest gap since 2008. It really shows the disparity of the capabilities, the capacities of these vehicle manufacturers to deal with all of the issues that the industry is throwing at it. And also, the magnitude of these issues.

So, the ranking remained the same: Toyota, Honda, General Motors, followed by Nissan, Ford, and then Stellantis. But the gap—the three really broke apart from the bottom three.

[00:03:48] Jan Griffiths: Dave, a question on timing for you. Did you gather the data before Trump announcement on tariffs, or did some of the data come in after?

[00:03:58] Dave Andrea: We were in the field between mid-February and mid-April. If you look at the roll-out of all the tariffs— I mean certainly it wasn't until April and May here that we knew what the auto sector specifically was going to be hit.

If we would take the survey today, the numbers would certainly change. But if you think about the processes, the way that each individual OEM handled the tariffs that was in place, right? So I don't know that the order would've changed at all. But certainly tariffs may have hit the top.

The other piece to think about here as well is this—that this is really a representative sample of the entire supply base. So where tarrifs certainly are a huge, huge issue for OEMs, first off, and then in turn their suppliers. But for some others, it may be a second-order issue. It's more about unintended costs, or it may be about warranty issues, or it may be all those other issues that the vehicle manufacturers and the suppliers deal with day in and day out.

[00:05:19] Jan Griffiths: We see Toyota leading the pack yet again, but with a significant increase. They've gone from 368 to 386. Angela, what's driving that? What are they doing so well consistently?

[00:05:35] Angela Johnson: I wish there was a magical answer for that, but they're really doing the things that they do well—even better.

[00:05:43] Jan Griffiths: Mm.

[00:05:44] Angela Johnson: That's making the difference in setting them apart. They increased all around. They particularly increased in their buyer characteristics—that’s those enabling behaviors. Things like accessibility, responsiveness, buyer knowledge, helping the supplier resolve issues. That took a steep jump up for Toyota this year. Last year, they were behind Honda and GM, and this year they're back on top. And I believe those behaviors helped propel them to the top of the overall board. They were able to lean into the relationship they've established and better create win-win outcomes for their suppliers.

[00:06:31] Dave Andrea: Yeah, and it may be oversimplifying, but I think they've gotten through a lot of their growth spurt going back and launching the Mazda-Toyota assembly plant here in North America. Looking at the battery plant and the battery sourcing, the North American purchasing team took the lead on all those elements, and I think they're catching their breath. And going back to the processes, the Toyota way, that the issues that are coming through now, they're able to handle better than they were when they were really focusing in on all that growth.

[00:07:09] Sig Huber: You know, Toyota has a very unique culture —the Toyota Way— which is based on two fundamental pillars. One is mutual respect, and the other is continuous improvement. And it's a culture that pervades every department, every person in the company.

They spend a lot of time and effort making sure that people within Toyota are aligned with the Toyota Way and working in their day-to-day jobs with respect to consistency with the principles of the Toyota Way. And I think that is really an advantage when it comes to supplier relations, because it fosters the types of things that are measured in the survey.

The other thing about Toyota is they have a very long-term perspective on things, and when it comes to their relationships, they're not always looking for a short-term solution. They're looking for what's best in the long term and what's best to continue to improve the organization as an extended enterprise—not just thinking of themselves as a company and the suppliers are separate. They really view the supply base as an extension of their enterprise and act accordingly.

[00:08:18] Angela Johnson: Most surprising things that I saw in the data is that consistency and predictability becomes their strength and it also becomes their threat. They become their own threat. And you dive down into the written responses that the suppliers gave us, consistency and predictability came up to the top for them and for Honda more so than anyone else.

And I can liken it to suppliers have become so used to a level of consistency and predictability that if it at all isn't there, or they perceive it to slip, then it comes to the top of their concerns that they're voicing for the OEM to address. So, as they are stabilizing operations, as suppliers are working with their US versus their Japan operations, we see comments on wanting to get the same level of consistency and predictability that they're used to from Toyota headquarters out of their North American operations—and at the same time, looking for more autonomy their local operations. Sig, how does that play in with your experience?

[00:09:34] Sig Huber: Yeah. You know, I think you raise a great point there about predictability. There's, of course, other things like communication and building trust and all those other elements that go into the score, but I think predictability is very, very important.

And that goes for predictability in management, predictability in approach, predictability in production schedules. There's a whole host of things that suppliers really want their customers to be predictable because then they can plan their businesses around it.

And with Toyota, they have their predictability. And you know, by contrast, if you compare, say, with Stellantis—they had a lot of challenges and rumors about the CEO leaving, and then the CEO left, and who's gonna be the new CEO. There's a lot of uncertainties there, which create hesitation, I think, in the minds of the suppliers. Not knowing who they're dealing with or how things are gonna change—and that creates in their minds, I think, a sense of risk.

Whereas with Toyota, they have this consistency that pervades even changes in positions. They have a brand new head of purchasing that's just started—I don't know, two, three months ago. Ryan Grimm, he's been there a long time, and he's got a great disposition, and I have no doubt that he's gonna continue the path that Toyota's been on. And we'll continue to take supplier relations seriously and improve them as they go forward.

And the suppliers sense that too. They understand that even though there's a change in the head of purchasing, it's going to be very, very similar to what they've been used to in the past. I think that creates comfort, and that creates Toyota as being more of a desirable customer of choice than others where there's a lot less predictability.

[00:11:21] Jan Griffiths: Talking about predictability—what did Toyota just announce, Angela, regarding a 52-week calendar? What's that all about?

[00:11:29] Angela Johnson: Toyota drilled out to its suppliers, not just 52-weeks of visibility to part number level—they also rolled out combining about 75 manual spreadsheets and different systems into a one-stop shop for suppliers to manage all things: EDI, capacity, and schedules.

What's really interesting about what they did—they’re not the only OEM doing that—but what I found interesting about their timing, and it's quite impressive when you look at the screens that they've produced, the written feedback we got from the suppliers in the survey indicates that suppliers wanted to see more schedules from Toyota.

They were very explicit on, "Hey Toyota, we need better visibility," and Toyota delivered. I fully expect that to impact positively their schedules next year—their their WRI scores.

[00:12:29] Jan Griffiths: And Dave, do you think that'll have an impact on other functions?

[00:12:33] Dave Andrea: Without a doubt, it does. It starts showing the interconnectedness of sales and marketing, dealer inventories, to production builds, to production schedules that purchasing is responsible for.

Toyota always had the most level production schedules. Where they became un-Toyota-like was when they started to adjust their production volumes around and schedules around, and it became more costly to serve Toyota. This is getting back a bit to the old Toyota.

One thing I would really emphasize is about consolidating their supplier portals and where the suppliers get information from. It's easier to obtain, and secondly, it's gonna be more accurate because it's all more consolidated than going to several different portals.

[00:13:33] Sig Huber: I think it's wonderful, and I think that the other OEMs are gonna be pressed to try to do something similar to compete with Toyota. But it's another example of them raising the bar when it comes to improving their relationships. And I think it's gonna be rewarded, and the suppliers are gonna really appreciate it and treat Toyota that much better.

[00:13:52] Jan Griffiths: Consistency, transparency, predictability—we're talking about trust feeling of security, of safety, being able to forecast, as you said, your business. A supplier wants to know what's coming at them, and they have to trust that data. They have to trust the process.

I feel that with Toyota, and certainly the three OEMs at the top of the pack, that they handle that through empowerment down to the buyer level—that there's a lot of trust internally, and buyers are able to make decisions their own. Whereas the three OEMs at the bottom don't have that. Is that a fair assumption, Angela?

[00:14:42] Angela Johnson: What I see in the data is suppliers are zeroed in just based on the industry, on the economy, on managing cost, and on navigating uncertainty. We see the suppliers, then they evaluate OEM behaviors, especially the ones that precede trust, fairness, accountability, equity.

They evaluate those through the bottom-line impacts of the OEM decisions. And where the OEMs are able to manage those better—with the supply base to collaborate better—those OEMs improved. Where the stronger relationships did not exist for Nissan, Ford, and Stellantis, those bottom-line impacts became a bigger issue—one more issue on top of a really big pile of challenges.

[00:15:42] Dave Andrea: And I think where it plays out are things like the speed of decision making. If the buyer is empowered to do something, then a decision can get made very quickly. The other area where it gets played out is with credibility and things like that—that the buyer is more able to be an advocate for that supplier when they go to engineering or manufacturing to get a decision that's more complex worked out, right? Because that buyer can go and actually advocate on behalf of the supplier because they are empowered to do that.

It's a small nuance, but if you add up all of those occurrences, that's where it gets powerful.

[00:16:36] Jan Griffiths: This reminds me of, Dave, when John McElroy joined me at the mic. I remember John's words exactly, and he said this—and we were talking about how the purchasing heads at the OEM level, you know, wanna do the right thing, believe and do the right thing. John's words exactly, and I quote: "Where it all breaks down is at the buyer level." So, making sure that the buyers are empowered and that there's a consistent process is critical to making sure that all of this works.

[00:17:10] Sig Huber: I think that's right. I made a comment earlier about the culture and the Toyota way. It pervades all levels of the organization, and it creates that consistency in behavior and the ability for buyers to behave in certain ways that in other organizations they might not be able to.

And it also comes down to the alignment of goals and objectives. And in other companies, the different departments tend to be misaligned in their goals and objectives, right? Finance has a very different set of goals and objectives than purchasing, and that they have a very different set of objectives to supply chain—and manufacturing has its own set. And it tends to be more siloed in other organizations because of the lack of that consistent culture. And that's one of the things that I think that Toyota Way really brings to Toyota as far as an advantage in managing their relationships.

Another point I wanted to make from the survey results that I found interesting was that the companies that historically have been better—the top three—actually distance themselves from the others in a time of crisis. And one of the advantages of having strong supplier relationships is that, when times get difficult, it makes it easier to collaborate. And that seems to have come through loud and clear in the survey results this year when things got difficult with the tariffs. One group acted one way and one group acted a different way—and it produced very, very different results in the eyes of the supply base.

[00:18:44] Dave Andrea: And that plays out down through the entire supply chain. So, what the survey measures is the vehicle manufacturer to the first tier. But if you think about those first tier suppliers of the top three, then turning over their shoulders and looking in crisis management, you have to get the second tier and the third tier coming along with you. It perpetuates down through the supply chain.

[00:19:13] Sig Huber: Angela, based on your background, what do you see that happened at General Motors when they really turned things around with respect to supply relations? Because they used to be at the bottom of the list—not at the bottom of the list, but in the bottom tier. And when Steve Kiefer came along and really embrace supplier relations, they really changed in a very rapid manner in their approach to dealing with suppliers. You were there at the time, what did you see, and how did they actually effectuate the change to become so effective?

[00:19:43] Angela Johnson: I think Steve brought in a buckle down focus on building relationships itself. He came out of the supply base. He dramatically increased the amount of communication and the way that the supply chain and the purchasing teams talked to their supply base. He increased the transparency in not only the decisions that the OEM was making, but in also the way that they were measuring performancee—Bringing in a mindset with buyers that you have to go out, you've gotta meet with your suppliers, get to know your suppliers, get to know your products, and be accessible. When you look at their scores today, those are where they're excelling—still: communication, accessibility, responsiveness.

To your point earlier, Sig, you're spot on. History and research have told us that when the economy gets bad, when the industry's really struggling, OEMs revert back their embedded ways of managing suppliers.

If that's true, then for GM, we would expect, with all of the turmoil, to see more emphasis on old-school behaviors—and that’s not present. Instead, we see more suppliers talking about them like they talk about Toyota in Honda.

They're still pushing back on a lot of those old-school behaviors. There's a lot to be gained in GM by aligning across engineering, manufacturing, finance, and purchasing. The fact that they were able to increase this year—that their scores went up those enabling behaviors, and supplier-as-a-partner, feeling equitable, win-win outcomes, over three vice presidents—tells you they are starting to turn the ship, looking at a real culture change.

[00:21:38] Jan Griffiths: This episode is sponsored by UHY. UHY and the Center for Automotive Research are digging into how suppliers quote and win with OEMs. The results drop at CAR MBS, September the 15th through the 17th at Michigan Central. Stay tuned.

[00:21:56] Sig Huber: I had conversations with suppliers when Steve was leaving and they were a little guarded and a little concerned about what was the direction gonna be with the changes. And it's continued in a very positive direction, which is wonderful for the company, and I think there's probably some very interesting lessons for everyone there as to how were they able to maintain that momentum.

[00:22:18] Angela Johnson: We see, when we compare the top three to the bottom three, the two that stood out the most were trust, which we talked about. The top three had 48% higher trust than the bottom three. And VP engagement. Those two had the biggest weight on what was separating gap, and we can attribute that to the leaders that are at Honda and Toyota and GM for continuing to drive consistency.

They're out there, they're working personally to build trust in the supply base. With the transition at Toyota to Ryan. With the transitions that we've seen at GM—from Steve to Shilpan to Jeff—you're seeing that consistency in values, in behaviors.

[00:23:11] Jan Griffiths: VP engagement to build trust, you can take this a couple of different ways. We just talked about empowerment and bias being able to make decisions, right? And the speed of decision making. If the VP is too involved in the detail to a level of micromanagement, that's bad. That's not what we're talking about here. What we're talking about is making sure that they are involved with the suppliers, building relationships, talking about collaboration, talking about the future. That's the kind of VP engagement I think we're talking about. Is that right, Angela?

[00:23:56] Angela Johnson: You're absolutely correct. When we study supplier relationships, it's pure connections that mean so much. And they mean a lot at every level. If there's harmony at the top levels of both organizations, it can overcome what might be challenging the lower levels of the organizations. And conversely, if there's not harmony in the top levels, it may challenge work that two peers who get along wonderfully at a buyer level are able to accomplish.

[00:24:30] Dave Andrea: And Jan, what you just describe of the VP with a lot of the decision making and things like that—that the consistency part that we've been talking about and predictability, because don't necessarily know how that VP's going to come down on one side or the other side of an issue.

The thing with the engagement piece, I think, is twofold. One is, they are supporting these types of behaviors, right? They're aligning to get that from the top level down through the buyers' office. But then, it's also an accessibility aspect of this too. And that's one that where Steve Kiefer, I think, you know, stepped out. He was at the supplier conferences. He was accessible.

And I would put Marlo Vitous at Stellantis in the same camp, right? She did not hide from the issues that Stellantis was facing—we all knew them. She didn't hide in Auburn Hill. She was out, and she was encouraging her buyers to get out as well.

[00:25:36] Angela Johnson: And Stellantis saw the biggest increase in their score for VP engagement.

[00:25:42] Jan Griffiths: Oh, so there you go. So, the data supports it, right there.

[00:25:46] Angela Johnson: Absolutely.

[00:25:47] Dave Andrea: But she's one person, and you have to get the rest of the organization and functions aligned with her.

[00:25:55] Sig Huber: I would expect that with Marlo running purchasing at Stellantis right now, that they will continue. She's allowed to pursue the improvement in relationships the way that I think she believes it needs to happen. And I think in the past, she had her hands tied a little bit by the organization as to what she was allowed to do and the level of approvals required from overseas as opposed to the autonomy here in North America. And I think that is all going to be changing as the leadership changes. And I would expect that Stellantis is gonna start to improve.

So, I was at an event with Marvin Washington from Stellantis, and he was very, very humble on stage and talking around these types of topics and saying, "Look, we want your feedback. We wanna understand how we're being difficult for you. We want to get better. And, you know, we don't always like to hear everything you say, but we need to hear it and we want you to tell us."

It was a very, very sort of raw and open, and a very fresh approach to what we've seen in the past from them. I think there's some good things coming from them as we go forward.

[00:27:08] Dave Andrea: They're gonna be tested with the rollout of new vehicle programs. Jan, as you were talking with —with tariffs— without a doubt, they approached it in a very structured way. But you have to go through those processes, right? And see what the outcomes truly are. And if those reinforce Marvin's message up on stage, then that's how you get the year-over-year improvements.

[00:27:34] Sig Huber: They have a new COO for North America, Antonio Filosa, and you know, he's rumored to be on the shortlist to be the CEO. And he's a purchasing guy—actually, he was manufacturing and then he was in purchasing. I worked with him very, very closely when he ran purchasing in Brazil, and he is a very charismatic guy. The suppliers really trust him and enjoy working with him. And he already has done quite a few things with suppliers, with the supplier advisory council, and is making his presence known to the supply base—which is gonna pay big dividends, I think, in the survey come next year for sure.

[00:28:10] Angela Johnson: I've been impressed with the engagement of the Stellantis team, really wanting to dive in and understand what's driving the results and where do they need to focus. They took a big hit, I think, in their score from the volume actions that they had in Q4. Timing wise, that was weighing on supplier's mind as they were taking the survey in Q1 of this year. You look at their data, you peel it back, you see—more so than any other OEM—a focus on volume impacts, meaning production schedule stability, forecast accuracy, lost volume due to program delays, plant shutdowns, cancellation, sunk capital, or capacity that's not being used. Those types of things weigh heavily on suppliers for Stellantis, and that reflected in their end result.

[00:29:06] Dave Andrea: Yeah. And so, even if they have a better process and even better payouts on tariff recovery. A supplier looks at Stellantis in total —all of those costs that Angela just ran through—against what I received back on tariffs. And if it's still outweighs the other costs, that's where they may not get full credit for what they put in place on tariff recovery.

[00:29:39] Sig Huber: It comes down to what we talked about earlier, which is predictability, right? The suppliers want predictability of their investments in the programs, and if there's charges coming their way for, you know, shipping in cardboard when they didn't have returnable packaging returned to them or warranty claims that may not be based entirely on the facts, or whatever it might be. All of those things start to erode the supplier's ability to make a profit and to predict what their return on investment's gonna be. And those are still some of the challenges that Stellantis is gonna face moving forward. Trying to figure out how to become a more predictable customer overall in all those areas that are not just the purchasing relationship with the suppliers.

[00:30:24] Dave Andrea: And without a doubt, going back in the history to Chrysler (FCA), to looking at Cerberus and all those other kinds of things, you can see that there's one of a personality-driven organization, it's been them. And so, depending upon who's in that chair for Vice President of Purchasing, their numbers swing back and forth because they don't have that kind of structure that we've talked about on a corporate basis—certainly Toyota and Honda have that in place. And it looks like GM is getting into that realm.

[00:31:10] Jan Griffiths: To be clear, Stellantis sits at the bottom of the chart right now at 141. However, I agree with all of you, that under the leadership of Marlo and Antonio Filosa, whether he stays as COO or whether he becomes a CEO, the combination of those two together, we will see a very different number this time next year. But let's switch to Ford. Ford continues to decline. What's happening, Angela?

[00:31:43] Angela Johnson: Ford was a combination of a thousand little declines. There wasn't anything in Ford's data that stood out that said, "Hey, they got worse in this." Like, each of the other OEMs had something that stood out. For Ford, was—everything just got worse. Leading that was supplier perceptions of communication.

So again, where are they going? What is the production plan? How much visibility do suppliers have to their business plan, and where do they fit in—so, frankly, they can plan their own operations?

That seemed to lead the pact with Ford, as well as—some of these we talk about—cost to serve, some of these unintended costs driven by their organizational complexity. They have part of their operations in different regions around the globe. Inherently, it was causing inefficiencies in the things that suppliers were hyper-focused on, like simply getting paid. Can I find the person to help me resolve my payment? And then, can we talk to each other in the same language? And how knowledgeable are they to get my issue fixed? Those simple things just chipped away at Ford's score.

[00:33:03] Dave Andrea: Where the reaction then from the vehicle manufacturers, when we present these numbers back, is—and rightfully so—they that they've stepped out on communication, right? They've put together more webinars, they have more town halls, they're doing more listening sessions, all of those kinds of things.

And that takes a ton of time and on both sides—on the OEM side and the supplier side—to participate in that. But if I have to make three phone calls to find out who it is that works your payment system, that's communication too. I could turn up the frequency on those external communications, but if my internal communications are bogged down, it overwhelms the response to negative.

It's an organization and systems issue. And by that, I mean it's an organization and systems issue from the standpoint that, one, the Vice President of Purchasing had reported up to the CFO. And so, that puts pressure on her purely on the financial end of the spectrum.

The second piece is this issue of decisions are made geographically. And so, if they've concentrated a purchasing organization —some of their decision-making— in India, and in Mexico, the speed of decision making gets slowed down. Particularly in a time we're talking about here—in crisis— you want your tooling payments paid on. It's the blocking and tackling. Why incur other costs on the suppliers when they have enough costs to deal with? Those are the things that, I think, they have to fix in the organization. And then, as Angela's saying, the people will come along.

[00:35:13] Sig Huber: So, I noticed in the results that at least for the past three years, those three OEMs that separated themselves at the top of the list were all able to improve every year during those three years. And largely people were still working from home as a result of COVID. How were they able to improve their supplier relationships even though they weren't actually having face-to-face meetings with the suppliers?

[00:35:39] Angela Johnson: You know, I'm gonna give the most unpopular answer ever—they got 'em back in the office. I'll tell you why I say that. Reading the data a couple years ago, particularly for GM—read the supplier verbatims. What are they saying? 'Buyers aren't in the office.' Why aren't your buyers in the office? Get your people back to work so we can meet face to face."

Didn't see that this year. Did not see a word of it from the top three—they’re back there. Their scores went up on accessibility. Go visit the supplier. Have the discussion in person. Old school, but it worked.

[00:36:19] Dave Andrea: And I think that also speaks more for the systems and the organization. Without a doubt, the people are very consequential—particularly in dealing with crises and workarounds— but if everybody knows how to behave, and it's predictable and consistent, it works better, right? Even if those people aren't in the office.

[00:36:48] Angela Johnson: Even one of the teams pointed out this was their first year that they had really brought their buyers back three a week, and they have believed that made a difference in their interactions with their supply base as well.

[00:37:01] Dave Andrea: Well, yeah. And back to Stellantis—without a doubt—trying to get people out, not just to the office, but out to the plants. That's huge, particularly for new buyers, so that they see the processes and know the parts.

[00:37:19] Angela Johnson: That does stand out a lot. When buyers don't know their supplier's part, it's one of the first things the suppliers seem to mention.

[00:37:29] Jan Griffiths: In closing, what is the 'so what' of the Working Relations Index? Why should OEMs care, Sig?

[00:37:38] Sig Huber: I have a perspective because I worked at both Toyota and at Chrysler, and I've seen how the relationships are managed and I've seen the reciprocal side of it. How the suppliers manage the OEM relationships based on a customer that they have good relationships with, and one that's a little bit more strained.

And it was really surprising to me when I first started at Chrysler, how poor the suppliers actually treated Chrysler— in some ways, it's actually quite unfair. Which are some of the same allegations that are leveled against Chrysler in the way that they treat suppliers. And so, there's like a mirror type of relationship there.

When you have good relationships, you in fact are treated better, which makes the relationship easier to manage. And as a result of that, it's been discussed many, many times in the supplier relations surveys that when a company has good supplier relationships, they get the A teams from the suppliers, and they get better supplier performance.

From my experience, what I've just seen is over the past couple of years, those OEMs that are in the top tier for supplier relations have also been improving in their financial results. And those that are in the bottom tier have actually been on a downward trend.

[00:38:51] Jan Griffiths: So, there is a relationship to the bottom line.

[00:38:54] Dave Andrea: And to Sig's earlier point about the Toyota Way and being in mutual respect, I think, Sig, that's what you just described, right? You know, in terms of the mutual respect of how the supplier treated Chrysler, is the way they feel that they got treated, right?

And I would go back to when Dan Knott went back into that role of Global VP and the type of respect though that he got—so it can turn around quick.

I believe that the OEMs need to care about this because we're in such a rapid revolution in the industry—whether that be on the product side, on the bill of material side, thinking about software and all those other types of things—such that the suppliers have limited resources, and so they are picking and choosing who to do business with.

And so, if you want to have the top engineering talent, the top financial resources, all of those things lined up in your supply base. That's where these partnerships, relationships—whatever word you want to use with it—pay off.

And the other thing I would challenge the OEMs with is: if they have their act together in terms of how do they work with their suppliers, it's basically the same principles in terms of how do they work with their labor force, how do they work with their government relations people, how do they work with their dealers. It gets that kind of predictability and consistency that we've been talking about across all of those functions.

[00:40:52] Jan Griffiths: Angela, why? Why care about the WRI? Why should OEMs care?

[00:40:57] Angela Johnson: Care because of the gap. Three went up, three went down. Those with better relationships get better results. Period.

When we tested WRI scores against financial performance for the OEM, Toyota has a same-year correlation. By that, I mean this: scores come out May 2025. If the trend continues, I would expect then for 2025, Toyota to post strong financial performance. When their scores are strong, their financial results are strong for that same year. To me, that says they're able to leverage the relationships to get the financial results.

[00:41:49] Jan Griffiths: There it is. Well, before we close today, I would like to take this opportunity say thank you to Dave Andrea for supporting me personally during my career in automotive and supply chain. He has seen me go through job changes and many different situations, and then launching Gravitas Detroit and the podcast.

Dave, I wanna say thank you for your unwavering support of me and my mission during my career. And I want to wish you a very happy and wonderful retirement. Your contributions—not only to me personally, but to this industry—are by many. You will be sorely missed. Thank you.

[00:42:39] Dave Andrea: Oh, and thank you, Jan. It's been a pleasure, and I can say equally that I've learned so much from you as well. I think we first met back in the OESA days, in the Chief Purchasing Officer's counsel, and that put me right in the middle of all of you professionals who really do have that passion for the industry. And you definitely have made your own contributions to the industry as well, Jan.

[00:43:10] Jan Griffiths: Well, thank you. Thank you. So, with that, it's a wrap. Dave Andrea, enjoy your retirement. Angela, Sig, thank you for joining me at the mic. We'll see you next time.

[00:43:19] Dave Andrea: Very good. Thanks, Jan.

[00:43:21] Sig Huber: Thanks for having us.

[00:43:23] Jan Griffiths: Thank you for listening to the Automotive Leaders Podcast. Click the listen link in the show notes to subscribe for free on your platform of choice. And don't forget to download the 21 Traits of Authentic Leadership PDF by clicking on the link below. And remember, stay true to yourself, be you, and lead with Gravitas, the hallmark of authentic leadership.