Winning and Retaining Business in the Australian Mining Equipment Sector, 2014

Overall trends in the data revealed: – Customer priorities in supplier selection are product quality and availability of parts – Suppliers perform well, but customer satisfaction is frequently lowest in the most important areas for customers – Volvo and Komatsu received the highest average satisfaction ratings, with Caterpillar considered the leading supplier for most categories of mining equipment – Account managers make a significant impact in the selection process – Although loyal to their suppliers, customers look for improvement in parts availability and product quality.

Scope

Winning and Retaining Business in the Australian Mining Equipment Sector, 2014 published by GlobalData – Mining Intelligence Centre, provides readers with a detailed analysis of customer preferences in the Australian mining sector. The analysis is based upon GlobalData’s survey of 110 mine managers, procurement managers and other key decision-makers

Reasons to buy

Identify key areas for differentiation by understanding what factors most influence choice of supplier.

Target product and service improvement areas based on where mining equipment suppliers are currently underperforming relative to customer expectations.

Develop successful sales and marketing strategies through an understanding of the leading competitors and their strengths and weaknesses.

Companies mentioned

Hitachi

Atlas Copco

Sandvik

Hastings Deering

Westrac

Liebherr

Weir Minerals

Flygt

Metso

Legra

Grundfos

TruFlo

Sykes

Wilden

Flowserve

Ingersol Rand

Cummins

Detroit Diesel

Perkins

Bridgestone

Goodyear

Michelin

Yokohama

Geovia

SAP

Vulcan

Runge

MineSight

Pron

Table of Contents

1 Executive Summary

2 Customer Priorities in Supplier Selection

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 GlobalData

8.4 About GlobalData

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 3

Figure 2: Precious Metals vs. Total Average Ratings for Key Factors 3

Figure 3: Average Importance Ratings vs Average Performance Rating for Main Supplier, 2014 4

Figure 4: Areas Where Main Suppliers Differentiated Themselves as Part of the Selection Process Relative to Their Competitors (%), 2014 6

Figure 5: If You Had the Choice Again Would You Choose the Same Manufacturer? (%), 2014 6

Figure 6: Do You Anticipate Switching to a Different Supplier Within the Next Five Years? (%), 2014 6

Figure 7: Areas of Improvement for Equipment Suppliers 7

Figure 8: Average Ratings for Key Factors When Choosing an Equipment Supplier, 2014 12

Figure 9: Average Ratings for Key Factors When Choosing an Equipment Supplier by Mine Type, 2014 13

Figure 10: Average Ratings for Key Factors When Choosing a Supplier (Part 1), 2014 14

Figure 11: Average Ratings for Key Factors When Choosing a Supplier (Part 2), 2014 14

Figure 12: Average Ratings for Key Factors When Choosing an Equipment Supplier by Commodity, 2014 15

Figure 13: Average Importance Ratings vs. Average Performance Rating for Main Supplier, 2014 18

Figure 14: Overall Performance vs. Overall Importance, 2014 19

Figure 15: Product Attributes – Performance vs, Importance, 2014 19

Figure 16: Cost – Performance vs Importance, 2014 20

Figure 17: Supplier Attributes and Capabilities – Performance vs Importance 21

Figure 18: Main Heavy Mobile Equipment Suppliers by Share of Respondents (%), 2014 23

Figure 19: Caterpillar – Breakdown of Respondents by Mine Type and Mineral (%), 2014 24

Figure 20: Caterpillar – ratings of importance versus actual manufacturer performance for key criteria when choosing a supplier (Part 1), 2014 25

Figure 21: Caterpillar – ratings of importance versus actual manufacturer performance for key criteria when choosing a supplier (Part 2), 2014 25

Figure 22: Joy Global – Breakdown of Respondents by Mine Type and Mineral (%), 2014 27

Figure 23: Joy Global – ratings of importance versus actual manufacturer performance for key criteria when choosing a supplier (Part 1), 2014 28

Figure 24: Joy Global – ratings of importance versus actual manufacturer performance for key criteria when choosing a supplier (Part 2), 2014 28

Figure 25: Komatsu’s Breakdown of Respondents by Mine Type and Mineral (%), 2014 30

Figure 26: Komatsu – ratings of importance versus actual manufacturer performance for key criteria when choosing a supplier (Part 1), 2014 31

Figure 27: Komatsu – ratings of importance versus actual manufacturer performance for key criteria when choosing a supplier (Part 2), 2014 31

Figure 28: Volvo – Breakdown of Respondents by Mine Type and Mineral (%), 2014 32

Figure 29: Volvo – ratings of importance versus actual manufacturer performance for key criteria when choosing a supplier (Part 1), 2014 33

Figure 30: Volvo – ratings of importance versus actual manufacturer performance for key criteria when choosing a supplier (Part 2), 2014 34

Figure 31: Leading Suppliers by Share of Respondents – Surface Equipment (%), 2014 36

Figure 32: Leading suppliers by share of respondents – Underground Equipment (%), 2014 37

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) 38

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) 39

Figure 35: If you had the Choice Again would you Choose the Same Manufacturer? 40

Figure 36: View of Main Mobile Mining Equipment Supplier vs Peers in the Market, 2014 41

Figure 37: Do you Anticipate Switching to a Different Supplier within the Next Five Years? 42

    Pricing

Discounts available for multiple purchases.

reportstore@globaldata.com
+44 20 7947 2745

Join our mailing list

Saved reports