Cost savings, getting orders authorised, multiple quotes

Has anyone ever looked into the effect of financially driven scatter gun cost saving measures things like but not limited to:

1. minimum 3 quotes get the cheapest
2. managers only allowed to authorize orders for piffling amounts, anything bigger than a stapler has to be authorized by a director and a box of bolts had to go to the GM (via the manager and director of course)
   
3. managers querying the use of a preferred supplier based on cost
4. purchasing departments insisting on buying full container loads of RMs to reduce transport costs
5. Scratching around for budgets to do trials that could unlock millions

How do they affect product quality, OTIF, morale (time wasted writing long moaning threads on quality forums ), equipment down time - how much money do they even (appear) to save.
Can anyone point me to a study where two similar business units with different financial regimes were compared?

A couple of examples I have had to live with: The project I am working on is a ground up alloy melting shop, no expense was spared on the laboratory equipment, vacuum melting furnace or the ceramics, all imported- so the alloy is very good but the equipment we requested for finishing the bars - centreless grinder, grit/bead blasters, abrasive saws all cheap local made, unreliable with poor performance. the grinder in particular has broken down several times and added weeks to delivery times. We have finally got something better on order but if we had the one we really wanted at the start of the project we'd have installed it and forgotten about it.

Choice of subcontract lab is another, we have a preferred lab for when our GDMS is down, they can turn an analysis around in 2 days or less if we are in need, they are relatively close if we want to visit, they participate in round robin testing with us and are very flexible. They are about 45 dollars more expensive than another lab at the other end of the country who are "the best in China", won't join in any kind of comparison and wont let us visit in-case we steal their IP and turnaround is about 10 days. Since we are certifying batches of 2000kg its a couple of cents per kg or 0.02% increase in cost. Guess which lab we are being pressured to use?

 

Probably good advice. I'm glad that I took this job, I have a pretty free rein and I have learned a lot over the last 4 years about the process, about project management (like when to dig your heels in!), about ops management, quality management and about myself. But I guess that I would see the same issues in my next company - they were present in my last.... and I have a bit of clout here and my own department to play with for now. I still have a few ideas that I want to try, I just wish I had something to back them up by showing they have worked elsewhere...

Like for instance on cost, I am sure that is is possible to reduce the cost of every single obvious input to a process and yet increase the cost of the product and or make less money; a theoretical example for my process might be - buy cheaper elemental metals with higher gas levels, use lower cost ceramics, use a cheaper third party test house with longer lead time. Cmbined they could save a dollar per kg which is significant for lower end alloys like 713c. But I also predict extended refining - increased power costs, increased labour, increased refractory wear (on lower quality ceramics?), reduced throughput due to extended melt times and fewer melts between relines (if we were capacity constrained that means less product/ lost sales right?) and increased inventory costs waiting for boxed product to be certified.