Why NUMMI improved quality for its cars?

NUMMI Case Study

The factory which NUMMI (New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc.)  took over was built by GM and operated by them from 1962 to 1982.At the time of its closure (1982), the Fremont employees were "considered the worst workforce in the automobile industry in the United States“. Employees drank alcohol on the job, were frequently absent (enough so that the production line couldn't be started), and even committed petty acts of sabotage such as putting "Coke bottles inside the door panels, so they'd rattle and annoy the customer.“

NUMMI was the first joint venture in the U.S. automobile industry, formed between GM and Toyota in 1984. The idea of reopening the plant emerged out of the need that GM had to build high-quality and profitable small cars and the need Toyota had to start building cars in the United States.

In spite of the history and reputation, when NUMMI reopened the factory for production in 1984, most of the troublesome GM workforce was rehired, with some sent to Japan to learn the Toyota Production System. By December 1984, the first car, a yellow Chevrolet Nova rolled off the assembly line. And almost right away, the NUMMI factory was producing cars with as few defects per 100 vehicles as those produced in Japan.

Please, share your opinion concerning these changes.What do you think about the main factors/reasons which changed employees' behavior under Toyota's management?

Comment on at least one of your peers' posts. 

NUMMI's sudden improvements in the quality of cars produced shows why company leadership and direction is crucial to the product produced. It goes without saying that their Japanese counterpart is more prideful in their work and this showed in the automobile quality. From an employee standpoint, the loss of their previous jobs likely provided them with a different prospective on job security. The opportunity to work in the new NUMMI factory would have lead to more dedicated employees than the previous endeavor. If the NUMMI factory continued to produce under performing cars with productional defects, than the factory would have just closed again. In a way, the employees had more to lose as the loss of their job would effect their livelihoods.