2.1 Introduction 2.2 Key Factors when Choosing a Supplier 2.3 Summary
3 Supplier Performance and Key Success Factors
3.1 Introduction 3.2 Overall Supplier Performance 3.3 Individual Supplier Performance Relative to Customer Importance 3.4 Leading Suppliers by Factor 3.5 Benchmarking the Major Suppliers 3.5.1 Caterpillar 3.5.2 Joy Global 3.5.3 Komatsu 3.5.4 Volvo 3.6 Leading Manufacturers by Equipment Type 3.7 How Suppliers Differentiate Themselves
4 Customer Retention and Key Improvement Areas
4.1 Introduction 4.2 Post-Sales Satisfaction with Suppliers 4.3 Customer Ratings of Main Supplier Relative to Peer Group 4.4 Anticipated Switching Within the Next Five Years 4.5 Key Areas for Product and Service Improvement
5 Action Points and Recommendations
6 Appendix I
6.1 Selected Data Tables
7 Appendix II
7.1 Survey Background 7.2 Analysis of our Survey Sample 7.3 Equipment Sourced from Main Supplier
8 Appendix III
8.1 What is This Report About? 8.2 Methodology 8.3 Contact Timetric 8.4 About Timetric 8.5 Disclaimer
List of Tables
Table 1: Highest average rated supplier for each criteria Table 2: Highest Average Rated Supplier for Each Criteria, 2014 Table 3: If you had the Choice Again, would you Choose this Manufacturer? Table 4: Anticipate Switching to a Different Supplier for these Products within the Next Five Years? Table 5: Average Ratings for Key Factors when Choosing an Equipment Supplier, 2014 Table 6: Average Ratings for Key Factors when Choosing an Equipment Supplier by Mine Type, 2014 Table 7: The Importance when Choosing a Supplier, 2014 Table 8: Average Ratings for Key Factors when Choosing an Equipment Supplier by Commodity, 2014 Table 9: Areas of Improvement for Equipment Suppliers, 2014
List of Figures
Figure 1: Average Ratings for Key Factors When Choosing an Equipment Supplier Figure 2: Precious Metals vs. Total Average Ratings for Key Factors Figure 3: Average Importance Ratings vs Average Performance Rating for Main Supplier, 2014 Figure 4: Areas Where Main Suppliers Differentiated Themselves as Part of the Selection Process Relative to Their Competitors (%), 2014 Figure 5: If You Had the Choice Again Would You Choose the Same Manufacturer? (%), 2014 Figure 6: Do You Anticipate Switching to a Different Supplier Within the Next Five Years? (%), 2014 Figure 7: Areas of Improvement for Equipment Suppliers Figure 8: Average Ratings for Key Factors When Choosing an Equipment Supplier, 2014 Figure 9: Average Ratings for Key Factors When Choosing an Equipment Supplier by Mine Type, 2014 Figure 10: Average Ratings for Key Factors When Choosing a Supplier (Part 1), 2014 Figure 11: Average Ratings for Key Factors When Choosing a Supplier (Part 2), 2014 Figure 12: Average Ratings for Key Factors When Choosing an Equipment Supplier by Commodity, 2014 Figure 13: Average Importance Ratings vs. Average Performance Rating for Main Supplier, 2014 Figure 14: Overall Performance vs. Overall Importance, 2014 Figure 15: Product Attributes – Performance vs, Importance, 2014 Figure 16: Cost – Performance vs Importance, 2014 Figure 17: Supplier Attributes and Capabilities – Performance vs Importance Figure 18: Main Heavy Mobile Equipment Suppliers by Share of Respondents (%), 2014 Figure 19: Caterpillar – Breakdown of Respondents by Mine Type and Mineral (%), 2014 Figure 20: Caterpillar - ratings of importance versus actual manufacturer performance for key criteria when choosing a supplier (Part 1), 2014 Figure 21: Caterpillar - ratings of importance versus actual manufacturer performance for key criteria when choosing a supplier (Part 2), 2014 Figure 22: Joy Global – Breakdown of Respondents by Mine Type and Mineral (%), 2014 Figure 23: Joy Global - ratings of importance versus actual manufacturer performance for key criteria when choosing a supplier (Part 1), 2014 Figure 24: Joy Global - ratings of importance versus actual manufacturer performance for key criteria when choosing a supplier (Part 2), 2014 Figure 25: Komatsu’s Breakdown of Respondents by Mine Type and Mineral (%), 2014 Figure 26: Komatsu - ratings of importance versus actual manufacturer performance for key criteria when choosing a supplier (Part 1), 2014 Figure 27: Komatsu - ratings of importance versus actual manufacturer performance for key criteria when choosing a supplier (Part 2), 2014 Figure 28: Volvo – Breakdown of Respondents by Mine Type and Mineral (%), 2014 Figure 29: Volvo - ratings of importance versus actual manufacturer performance for key criteria when choosing a supplier (Part 1), 2014 Figure 30: Volvo - ratings of importance versus actual manufacturer performance for key criteria when choosing a supplier (Part 2), 2014 Figure 31: Leading Suppliers by Share of Respondents – Surface Equipment (%), 2014 Figure 32: Leading suppliers by share of respondents – Underground Equipment (%), 2014 Figure 33: When Choosing to Buy from this Supplier, where do you Feel They Differentiated Themselves as Part of the Selection Process Relative to the Competition? (Part 1) Figure 34: When Choosing to Buy from this Supplier, where do you Feel They Differentiated Themselves as Part of the Selection Process Relative to the Competition? (Part 2) Figure 35: If you had the Choice Again would you Choose the Same Manufacturer? Figure 36: View of Main Mobile Mining Equipment Supplier vs Peers in the Market, 2014 Figure 37: Do you Anticipate Switching to a Different Supplier within the Next Five Years?
Samwon Bldg., 210-1 Nonhyun-dong, Gangnam-gu, 135-996, Seoul, Korea | LNH, Inc.
Tel : 82-2-554-0001 / Fax : 82-2-3444-5501 / E-mail : sales@landh.co.kr
Copyright ⓒ 2008 LNH, Inc. All rights reserved.
Login
Location : 
