「華人戴明學院」是戴明哲學的學習共同體 ,致力於淵博型智識系統的研究、推廣和運用。 The purpose of this blog is to advance the ideas and ideals of W. Edwards Deming.

2016年12月23日 星期五

Trust

Gourmet meals or “Karaoke Fridays” aren’t going to boost employee engagement. Instead, create a culture of trust.

Management behaviors that foster employee engagement
HBR.ORG

2016年12月1日 星期四

"15分鐘充電80% 保時捷發力研發電動汽車" (彭博商業周刊)

這篇文章歸類困難。我翻譯過的【精實革命】(Lean Thinking)中對90年代的保時捷有不少之記錄。對於顧客的充電要求和心理之說明,很可參考。

【即時頭條】15分鐘充電80% 保時捷發力研發電動汽車
在負責Cayman和Boxster這兩款保時捷(Porsche)雙門跑車的那些年裡,維克巴赫(Stefan Weckbach)從來沒遇到過將公司首款全電動車推向市場時所碰到的難題:引擎聲音。電動汽車或許安靜得有點不像保時捷跑車了。「顧客會因為聲音而熱血沸騰。」維克巴赫說,他負責研發將於2019年面市的第一款保時捷電動轎車。「顧客告訴我們,『我們很喜歡保時捷的引擎轟鳴聲,希望電動車也能發出同樣的聲音。』」
維克巴赫帶領著一支30人左右的團隊,負責四門轎車Mission E的研發,這款電動車像是保時捷Panamera的縮小版。團隊中的每個成員都是某方面的專才,如設計、後勤或者資金。團隊還能借力保時捷公司數千名專家資源來處理各種挑戰,不管是細節問題(如車門鉸鏈的強度)還是根本性的問題(車型是敞篷車還是運動型多功能車)。
在保時捷大力研發電動車之際,整個汽車行業已經開始向電動車領域傾斜,歐盟也準備出台嚴格限制傳統汽車二氧化碳排放的規定,定於2020年生效。研究公司LMC Automotive預計,到2020年全球電動汽車的銷售量將翻兩番,超過120萬輛。平治(Mercedes-Benz)創建了電動汽車品牌EQ; BMW在2013年推出電動車i3,如今準備推出電動SUV和Mini車型; Tesla旗下售價6.5萬美元以上的Model S電動車銷售強勁,計劃明年推出售價3.5萬美元的Model 3車型。「整個汽車行業都在向電動車傾斜,保時捷也不應該缺席。」德國貝爾吉施格拉德巴赫的應用科技大學(University of Applied Sciences)研究汽車行業的專家布拉澤(Stefan Bratzel)表示。
保時捷在「電動化」過程中面臨一定風險。幾乎沒有汽車製造商像保時捷這樣擁有忠誠度極高的客戶。當他們深愛的保時捷推出了家庭友好的SUV系列,其傳統跑車的鐵桿粉絲頗感不安。確實,保時捷辨識度最高的車型還是發動機後置的911跑車,但2011年以來SUV佔據了保時捷的大部分銷量。公司把電動車Mission E的預算定在10億歐元左右,其中包括正在斯圖加特車廠(911和Boxster等車型皆在此處生產)附近正在建的新油漆車間和組裝車間。保時捷還表示會僱傭1400人來從事設計、市場和組裝方面工作。「我們希望成為未來電動跑車的代表。」保時捷行政總裁布魯姆(Oliver Blume)表示。
雖然保時捷過去十年來大部分時間都在研發電動車樣車,但這次發力真正始於2014年。2014年末,維克巴赫開始建立自己的團隊,同時揹負著一個幾乎是不可能完成的任務:為2015年9月的法蘭克福國際汽車展(Frankfurt International Auto Show)打造一輛可行駛的原型電動車。設計師花了幾個月的時間來畫草圖,根據時任保時捷行政總裁、現任大眾(Volkswagen)行政總裁的穆勒(Matthias Müller)的設想,第一輛電動車應該是轎車。「傳統主義者還沒有準備好接受一輛電動跑車。」法蘭克福投資銀行Bankhaus Metzler的分析師皮佩爾(Jürgen Pieper)說。
維克巴赫表示,保時捷的設計師需要面對現實,著力於可以實現的想法。在前端沒有引擎的情況下(電動車的發動機通常直接和車輪或車軸相連),這款車本可以實現很低的前部,但依然達不到設計師想要的那種低度,因為還是有很多元件需要放置在車廂前面。「有時候,我們確實是為了幾毫米的距離在奮鬥。」維克巴赫回憶道。
如今,維克巴赫的團隊正在歐洲各地測試幾款樣車,不過它們都被偽裝成了其他車型。在試駕了16萬公里後,樣車為研發者提供了駕駛體驗方面的洞見。其中最重要的是駕車者對里程的焦慮和對充電的不耐煩,這些成了研發過程中著重解決的基礎問題。如果充電一次不能維持480公里的駕駛里程,而且充電時間在15分鐘以上,消費者就會剋制自己的購買慾望。
按照保時捷的說法,快速充電是其電動車的重要優勢:保時捷採用的是800伏的電池組,而不是行業標準400伏。保時捷稱,這一充電技術能讓顧客在15分鐘內把電池充滿80%,確保400公里的行程。充電系統還採用了更輕的充電線,使車重減輕了約23公斤,進一步提高了續航里程。維克巴赫表示,這款電動車達到了600馬力,從靜止提速至100公里/小時只需3.5秒,最高時速為250公里,這「將是一輛真正的保時捷。」撰文/Christoph Rauwald and David Rocks

2016年11月21日 星期一

評:A Fake Egyptian Cotton Scandal Has Arrived


W. Edwards Deming【轉危為安】(台北:經濟新潮,2015)  第6
品質與消費者

早期放映有聲電影的問題,大多因為操作說明書不當所造成的。這些從德文譯成英文的說明書文章不通,譯者兩德、英文都不精。──華盛頓電影人學會公報196711月。


工業不斷地發展,消費者的偏好也是。雙方都要求更多、品質要更好。──埃及棉花輸出公司發言人,摘錄自1971115日《紐約時報》。
https://books.google.com.tw/books?id=i2lB09HvPpsC&pg=PT250&lpg=PT250&dq=DEMING+OUT+OF+CRISIS+COTTON&source=bl&ots=F1KgUaqUAP&sig=DRyCWbjhxoaPLcg0Vxm_g4bm1jM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjd0diLsbnQAhUEOJQKHc8aDfYQ6AEILjAD#v=onepage&q=%20COTTON%20exporting&f=false

Your sheets aren't what you think they are.

Turns out that stores like Target and Wal-Mart have been selling premium-priced sheets purportedly made of Egyptian cotton, but that may in reality be woven with lower-quality cotton blends.
BLOOMBERG.COM

2016年11月9日 星期三

美國大選與民調

Donald J. Trump has stunned America and the world, riding a wave of populist resentment to defeat Hillary Clinton in the race to become the 45th president of the United States.


Henri Matisse - Le laboratoire intérieur. Aux musées des Beaux-Arts de Lyon.



Hanching Chung 我在選前一直接到兩組衝突的信息:英國獨立報、鏡報等報Clinton的醜聞、CNN的民調....都偏Trump.... (10來年前,美國很多人反對被政界-總統被BUSH、CLINTON等家族壟斷,成何體統.....我一直注意這暗潮......)
"It was always going to be a contest between authoritarian populism and progressive populism, eventually. For now, authoritarian populism has won. That's the real meaning of Donald Trump. But if we are united and smart and disciplined, progressive populism will triumph, because it's humane."--Robert Reich
~~~~~無法信服的說法
美國大選結果 為什麼所有的民調都猜錯了?
作者:張詠晴  天下當期精選
在美國2016年總統選戰期間,川普為全美、甚至全世界人口,帶來一場有生以來看過的最荒謬政治大戲。數日前,美國選舉民調、政治分析師幾乎是一面倒主張,希拉蕊會是選舉贏家。但大選結果卻打了他們的臉。為什麼?

大選前,《紐約時報》預測,希拉蕊有85%的機率當選總統。《哈芬登郵報》更是篤定說,希拉蕊有98.3%機率勝出。政治新聞網站「FiveThirtyEight」說,希拉蕊有接近67%機率會贏。
但到了台灣時間9日中午,《紐約時報》改口,聲稱川普有95%機率入主白宮。
部分原因或許在於川普善於動員民調機構無法預測的那一群選民。
比方說,川普打動白人勞動階層,而這一群人過往不太有意願投票。川普不按過去遊戲規則打選戰,顯然讓先前沒被拉票雷達鎖定的一群人很興奮。
另一種可能是,其實想投川普的選民,自覺投給川普很丟臉,因此他們在接受民調訪問時,會做出違心之論,為的是不想被其他人知道,自己支持一位有種族歧視和性別歧視的候選人。
第3種可能是,美國人根本還沒準備好接受一位女總統,而且,他們將這種「保守」、「不夠進步」的想法偷偷地藏在心裡,直到進入投票所後,才展現出來。
民調公司、學者專家難以用任何既有的理論模型,套用在這群選民身上。畢竟,美國主要大黨過去從沒提名過女性總統候選人,又怎麼會有可套用的分析模型?
最後一個可能的原因是「確認偏誤」。也就是說,民調公司或媒體太有自信,而忽略了任何不利或與自身想法牴觸的資訊。
這確實非常可能發生,因為菁英們,以及自認非常懂美國政壇的專家們,一旦發現與牴觸預期的資訊,可能會選擇故意淡化它,或視而不見,進而影響預測準確度。

2016年10月30日 星期日

談:康乃爾大學商學院的創新指數;創新v (中國) 專利件數:好奇心v 專利戰 strong negative correlation between innovation and religiosity

2016.10.31 才回去看2015年9月康乃爾大學商學院的創新指數等地說明。
這種 (60~70個指標)加權指數等說法,可能只比單一指標多些,不過,有心人應該去研究
原始資料,去思考。

Global innovation rankings
The innovation gameSep 17th 2015, 12:50 BY L.S. & THE DATA TEAM





WHICH is the world’s most innovative country? Answering this question is the aim of the annual Global Innovation Index and a related report, which were published this morning by Cornell University, INSEAD, a business school, and the World Intellectual Property Organisation. The ranking of 140 countries and economies around the world, which are scored using 79 indicators, is not surprising: Switzerland, Britain, Sweden, the Netherlands and America lead the pack. But the authors also look at their data from other angles, for instance how countries do relative to their economic development and the quality of innovation (measured by indicators such as university rankings). In both cases the results are more remarkable. The chart above shows that in innovation many countries in Africa punch above their economic weight. And the chart below indicates that, even though China is now churning out a lot of patents, it is still way behind America and other rich countries when it comes to innovation quality.





~~~~~


Even though China is now churning out a lot of patents, it is still way behind America and other rich countries when it comes to innovation quality

















Which is the world’s most innovative country? From the archive


Global innovation rankings


ECON.ST







2016.1.16


專利件數 VS 宗教熱忱?



The IMT Institute for Advanced Studies Lucca have found a strong negative correlation between innovation, as measured by patents, and religiosity, measured by the share of a population that self-identifies as religious. Today’s ‪#‎Dailychart‬ shows more religious countries tend to be less innovative http://econ.st/1JN9YKy


2014.12.14
.
近20~30來,商界通常以某國取得的美國專利件數,作為該國的創新 (innovation)能力的指標。
所以近年來中國"專利件數"的成績特好,幾乎是美國和日本的總和,即遙遙領先世界各國。

"專利件數"指標的問題是未考慮專利的"質"、專利領域的分布等等問題。
專利的效益,可能有所謂"Pareto分布",即呈"重要的少數"和"瑣碎的多數"分布。
另外,真正的大創新 (transformative innovation),可能是科學上的好奇心之賜,而不是採"攻堅"方式、或填補"專利地圖"的方式。

這可以用哥德的詩來說明:
如其好奇心不以強烈的魔力引誘人,
那麼你說,人怎麼會領會
世間的種種物事多麼美妙地互相關連維繫?因為他先企求新的東西,
然後勤勉不倦地把有益的東西尋覓;
最後貪求能使他變成高貴的真善的事理。---周學普譯 《赫爾曼與陀羅特亞》頁15
*****


2015年的美國發明專利數排行榜
IBM公司2015年在美國取得7,355項專利,連續第23年稱霸美國,三星電子公司則緊追在後。第三名至第五名依序為Canon、高通和Google。這項排名僅計入以技術功能為主的發明專利,不包括外型、圖樣設計為主的新式樣專利(design patent)。
美國專利分析機構 IFI Claims 於2016/01/13公布美國發明專利(utility patent)的50強排行榜,藍色巨人 IBM 公司2015年在美國取得7,355項專利,連續第23年稱霸美國。
根據 IFI Claims 統計資料指出,2015年美國核發的專利為298,407項,較之2014年的空前新高紀錄300,678項少了一點,這現象是2007年以來的首見下滑。就退件的專利數增加,隱含可能肇因和美國專利商標主管當局的嚴格審核有相依關係。此外,2014年6月美國最高法院的裁定,讓軟體以及在網路上做生意的技術更難以取得專利。
IFI 的資料還顯示,與影像資料處理和辨識資料相關的發明大幅增加,汽車的未來也趨動創新。專利多集中在大型企業,26%的專利掌握在前50大企業手裡。
前五強(Top5)的排名情況如下:
韓國三星(Samsung)以5,072項拿下第二,
日本 Canon 以4,134項專利取得居第三強,
美國高通(Qualcomm)以2,900項落在第四強,
美國谷歌(Google)以2,835項擠進前五強排名。
其中高通(Qualcomm)由2014年的第7上升到2015年的第4名,谷歌(Google)則是由2014年的第八強進步3名擠進2015年的前五。
Top50(前50強)有兩家台灣公司進榜,其一是台積電(tsmc),另一則是鴻海(Hon Hai)。
2014年台積電以1,460項專利排行位居23,2015年專利數增加到1,774項,排名上升到第13名,一口氣進步10名。
2014年鴻海以1,537項專利和 Ericsson 並列18,只是不過,鴻海在2015年的專利數降至1,083項,排名只得落到第29名。
2015年第6到第10排名,依序是日本東芝(Toshiba, 2,627項)、日本索尼(Sony, 2,455項)、韓國 LG 電子(2,242項)、美國英特爾(Intel, 2,048項),美國微軟(Microsoft, 1,956項)。
與之2014年相較,Sony 排名由第4落到第7,微軟和日本Panasonic 則因為開始將部份專利配置到旗下轄屬子公司持有而分散總量,因此使得2015年的排名由第5掉到第10,Panasonic 由第10掉到第18名。

2016年10月28日 星期五

The "Real" Fatal Mistake That Doomed Samsung’s Galaxy Note


在回報有問題的手機中,分別取得 117 隻屬於第一批,以及 90 隻,屬於第二批。經過分析,大部分可以歸責於電池的問題,其餘問題、或是未驗出問題的比例較低。
在第一批有問題的 Galaxy Note 7 中,所採用的電池來自於三星 SDI,主要的 72.6% 明顯是電池問題。
而第二批出貨的 Galaxy Note 7 分析結果,因爲更換爲 ATL 的電池芯。所以檢驗出明顯是電池的問題有下降。不過仍然有 61.1% 跟電池有關。但是究竟是電池芯的問題,還是手機結構、電路板、軟體造成電池也會燃燒、爆炸,目前仍然在繼續追查中。

「其餘原因」需要更深的分析,以及警惕

無論是第一批 Galaxy Note 7,還是第二批分別有 12.8%,17.8% 的無法找出確實原因。這就更加耐人尋味。
三星表示分析仍會繼續,將找出確實的原因,並且改善。不過從以上的幾個數據來看,明顯 Galaxy Note 7 的問題並非來自於單一原因。這對於往後三星的手機設計、出貨,或是其他品牌的手機都產生了警惕作用。
隨著手機的發展,AP 處理器時脈、核心數大量增加、機型變薄、電池容量變大。在耗電、發熱的同時,還要做到密封的防水。是不是問題僅在 Galaxy Note 7 上發生?還是可能成爲高階手機的潛在問題?值得深究。

這篇遠比中文摘要版多出許多資訊,尤其是在美國與CPSC單位的產品召回之互動.......

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fatal-mistake-that-doomed-samsungs-galaxy-note-1477248978?mod=europe&mod=djemITPE_h


The Fatal Mistake That Doomed Samsung’s Galaxy Note

On the verge of challenging Apple’s mobile phone dominance, the South Korean company made a rushed decision, based on incomplete evidence, that later forced it to kill the model.


Attendees gather around display tables to view the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 smartphone during a launch event in August in New York City.
Attendees gather around display tables to view the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 smartphone during a launch event in August in New York City. PHOTO: DREW ANGERER/GETTY IMAGES
The X-ray and CT scans showed a pronounced bulge.
After reports of Galaxy Note 7 smartphones catching fire spread in early September, Samsung Electronics Co. executives debated how to respond. Some were skeptical the incidents amounted to much, according to people familiar with the meetings, but others thought the company needed to act decisively.
A laboratory report said scans of some faulty devices showed a protrusion in Note 7 batteries supplied by Samsung SDI Co., a company affiliate, while phones with batteries from another supplier didn’t.
It wasn’t a definitive answer, and there was no explanation for the bulges. But with consumers complaining and telecom operators demanding answers, newly appointed mobile chief D.J. Koh felt the company knew enough to recall 2.5 million phones. His suggestion was backed by Samsung’s third-generation heir apparent, Lee Jae-yong, who has advocated for more openness at one of the world’s most opaque conglomerates.
That decision in early September—to push a sweeping recall based on what turned out to be incomplete evidence—is now coming back to haunt the company.
Two weeks after Samsung began handing out millions of new phones, with batteries from the other supplier, the company was forced to all but acknowledge that its initial diagnosis was incorrect, following a spate of new incidents, some involving supposedly safe replacement devices. With regulators raising fresh questions, Messrs. Lee and Koh decided to take the drastic step of killing the phone outright.
 Samsung discontinued production of Galaxy Note 7 smartphones after incidents of the phones catching fire.
Samsung discontinued production of Galaxy Note 7 smartphones after incidents of the phones catching fire. PHOTO: ASSOCIATED PRESS
The Galaxy Note series helped make Samsung a smartphone leader, and the Note 7, its most advanced phone ever, had all the makings of a hit. For a moment, it looked like the Galaxy Note could win over users of Apple Inc.’s iPhone and cement Samsung as one of the world’s most dominant technology companies.
Instead, as a result of the flammable phones and the botched recall Samsung’s leaders are now struggling to salvage the company’s credibility. At risk is the expected February launch of its next flagship smartphone, likely to be called the Galaxy S8.
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, which oversees product recalls in Samsung’s biggest smartphone market, is expected to investigate whether Samsung notified the agency soon enough of dangers posed by the device. Samsung’s decision to launch its own recall, bypassing the CPSC’s formal process for a time, may have prevented regulators from figuring out more about the root cause, some U.S. lawmakers suspect.
Samsung still doesn’t have a conclusive answer for what’s causing some Note 7s to catch fire.
A Samsung spokeswoman said the company worked quickly with regulators and took immediate action when problems arose with the phone. “We recognized that we did not correctly identify the issue the first time and remain committed to finding the root cause,” she said. “Our top priority remains the safety of our customers and retrieving 100% of the Galaxy Note 7 devices in the market.”
Outside experts have pointed to a range of possible culprits, from the software that manages how the battery interacts with other smartphone components to the design of the entire circuit.
Engineers are also looking into the possibility that the battery case may have been too small to house a battery of that capacity, according to one Samsung mobile executive.
Big product recalls are never easy. Consumers, however, are often willing to forgive mistakes if they believe the company is looking out for them and moving swiftly to address problems.
“What Samsung should have done, very early on, was to share even its preliminary findings or thoughts” with U.S. regulators rather than pushing its own recall, said Stuart Statler, a former CPSC commissioner and independent product safety consultant in Mooresville, N.C.
Samsung executives have delayed the development of the Galaxy S8 device by two weeks as engineers work to get to the bottom of the Note 7’s overheating problem, according to a member of the Galaxy S8 development team.
Meanwhile, investors have shaved off roughly $20 billion in Samsung’s market value. The company has said the recall would cost it $5 billion or more, including lost sales.
ENLARGE
Introduced in 2011, the Galaxy Note series has served as a point of pride for the South Korean company, which was long derided for following—and sued for allegedly copying—the iPhone.
The bigger-screen phone was in tune with consumer tastes. When iPhones were shrinking in size, the Galaxy Note anticipated the shift to bigger handsets, which earned it the nickname “phablet,” a mashup of phone and tablet.
By the time Samsung released its third iteration in September 2013, the Galaxy Note was a certified hit, selling 10 million units in two months. The next year, Apple released its first Galaxy Note-sized iPhone.
As word reached Samsung executives that only incremental changes were likely for Apple’s iPhone 7 this year, Mr. Koh and other top executives grew confident about their prospects for a head-to-head fall release of the next version. The company decided to skip the number 6 and jump straight to 7, a name change that would invite direct comparisons with Apple’s model.
Samsung’s engineers packed new features, including an iris scanner, water resistance, an improved stylus and about 16% more battery life than its previous Note device. Presales for the Note 7 started strong after Mr. Koh introduced the device at a lavish event at a theater in Midtown Manhattan on Aug. 2. Analysts boosted their projections for Samsung’s earnings, while investors pushed the stock to record highs.
As user reports of overheating began to trickle in days later, company executives were at first unruffled. Some suspected that many of the alleged incidents had been faked, and argued that even a small number of genuine cases shouldn’t overshadow the fact that millions of smartphones were working fine, according to people familiar with their thinking.
Gathering at Mr. Koh’s office at R5, the 27-story office tower overlooking Samsung’s sprawling Digital City campus south of Seoul, he and other mobile executives, including his predecessor, J.K. Shin, and longtime Samsung top lieutenant G.S. Choi, examined the X-ray and CT scan reports of the phone, which appeared to show heat damage to the internal structure of the battery, according to people familiar with the discussions.
Messrs. Lee and Koh believed they had all the evidence they needed to conclude the problem lay with Samsung SDI’s batteries, these people said. They argued it was more important for Samsung to do “the right thing” and act, in the words of one of the people familiar with the matter, rather than wait for more information. Doing so would have left customers in the dark longer and potentially allowed the crisis to get worse.
On Sept. 2, Mr. Koh entered a news conference room in downtown Seoul to address reporters. Without providing names, he said the company had identified a problem with one of its suppliers and it would shift production to another supplier it believed hadn’t caused the problems.
People familiar with the matter say that the supplier Samsung planned to rely on was Amperex Technology Ltd., a unit of Japanese electronic parts maker TDK Corp.
In Washington, Mr. Koh’s announcement came as a surprise to the Consumer Product Safety Commission. Typically, companies work jointly with the CPSC to study a problem and plan a recall together.
Samsung didn’t notify the CPSC of the problems until later that day, according to people familiar with the matter—about two weeks after the first reported Note 7 incident.
CPSC regulations require companies to report potential product hazards within 24 hours, though the commission allows companies that are “truly uncertain” about an issue to spend a “reasonable time” investigating the situation.
Samsung also took the little-noticed decision to pursue what’s known as fast-track resolution with the CPSC. The program allows a company to shorten the agency’s sometimes-lengthy investigation of a product problem, while avoiding a formal finding by the CPSC of a defect—a maneuver that can insulate manufacturers from product-liability litigation.
The CPSC warns that some companies might not want a fast-track resolution in situations where “complex technical issues…require more time to resolve.”
At first, Samsung’s recall solution seemed to work. Consumers were turning in their phones and asking for new Note 7 phones in about 90% of the cases, Samsung said. The company’s executives basked in praise, particularly from the South Korean press that Samsung executives read obsessively, who credited Samsung with acting swiftly.
The CPSC, though, appeared unhappy with some of the company’s maneuvers. A week after Mr. Koh’s recall announcement, on Sept. 9, the agency took the unusual step of warning consumers not to use the phones while it did more research, and said it would work to determine whether Samsung’s plan to issue replacement phones was “an acceptable remedy.”
A few days later, Samsung and the CPSC finally agreed to a formal joint recall.
Meanwhile, complaints about overheating replacement phones, and of isolated cases of battery failures, began emerging. A Samsung spokesman said initially there was no safety concern.
In China, where the company used only Amperex-supplied batteries in its Note 7s, the company dismissed reported smartphone fires as fabrications, arguing it was impossible for those batteries to have caused problems.
As it became clear the reported problems were multiplying, employees describe a kind of gallows humor setting in. One mobile division executive described the Galaxy Note 7 as a “radioactive” topic, with staffers afraid of even discussing it in the company canteen.
A local television news crew camped outside the offices at 6 a.m. to film a report about how many lights were on at the company, to illustrate the depth of the company’s crisis.
Then came the evacuation of a Southwest Airlines Co. flight in early October because of a smoking Samsung smartphone.
Top executives from major telecoms operators, including Verizon Communications Inc.’s Lowell McAdam, urged Mr. Lee to quickly kill the Galaxy Note 7 smartphone, according to people familiar with the matter. The executives told Mr. Lee the smartphone was becoming increasingly unsalable.
On Oct. 11, Mr. Lee called Mr. Koh and ordered him to discontinue the smartphone. Later that day, Mr. Koh wrote a letter to the company’s mobile division, a copy of which was reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, calling the crisis “one of the toughest challenges we have ever faced.”
While the decision to abort the Note 7 has halted the damage for now, analysts have raised questions about the future of the Galaxy Note series, arguing that the brand has become too tarnished by the crisis and that the company should retire it altogether.
At least two U.S. senators, Bill Nelson of Florida and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, have asked for more details about Samsung communication with the CPSC and its handling of the phone crisis. Mr. Blumenthal noted in a letter to Samsung released publicly that so far in the current fiasco, Samsung has reported 96 incidents of batteries overheating in the U.S., including 13 burns and 47 cases of property damage.
Last week, at the urging of CPSC Chairman Elliot Kaye, the agency approved a proposal for a wide-ranging inquiry into lithium ion and related batteries in coming months.
“There are few things in life I’m reasonably confident of predicting; one of those is….we’re going to have yet another issue of lithium ion batteries catching fire” from a range of devices, said CPSC commissioner Robert Adler. “This is just a massive problem.”

網誌存檔