Winning and Retaining Business in the African 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 have lower levels of satisfaction in key areas – Sandvik 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, alongside product quality and use of the latest technology – Although loyal to their suppliers, customers look for improvement in parts availability and product quality.

Scope

Winning and Retaining Business in the African Mining Equipment Sector, 2014 published by GlobalData's Mining Intelligence Centre, provides readers with a detailed analysis of customer preferences in the African mining equipment sector. The analysis is based upon GlobalData’s survey of 108 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

Bateman Engeineering

Babcock Equipment

Bell Equipment

Eickhoff

MAN AG

Shantui SA

Wacker Neuson

Gekko Systems

HPE Africa

Trident Mining Systems

Kemach JCB Equipment

DRA Mineral Projets

Advantage ACT

Afgen

African Explosives

BLANIC

Bluhm Burton Engineering

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 Category

3.5 Benchmarking the Major Suppliers

3.5.1 Caterpillar

3.5.2 Joy Global

3.5.3 Komatsu

3.5.4 Sandvik

3.5.5 Atlas Copco

3.6 Leading Manufacturers by Equipment Type

3.7 How Suppliers Differentiated 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 the 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, 2014

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: Average Importance Ratings for Key Factors when Choosing an Equipment Supplier, 2014

Table 5: Average Importance Ratings for Key Factors when Choosing an Equipment Supplier by Mine Type, 2014

Table 6: Importance Ratings for Key Factors when Choosing an Equipment Supplier, 2014

Table 7: Average Importance Ratings for Key Factors when Choosing an Equipment Supplier by Commodity, 2014

Table 8: Average Performance Ratings for Main Current Supplier, 2014

Table 9: Average Performance Ratings by Main Supplier, 2014

Table 10: Weighted Average Performance Rating by Main Supplier, 2014

Table 11: Areas of Improvement for Equipment Suppliers, 2014

Table 12: View of Main Mobile Mining Equipment Supplier vs Peers in the Market, 2014

List of Figures

Figure 1: Average Ratings for Key Factors When Choosing an Equipment Supplier – Highest- and Lowest-Rated Criteria, 2014

Figure 2: Average Importance Ratings vs Average Performance Rating for Main Supplier, 2014

Figure 3: Areas Where Main Suppliers Differentiated Themselves as Part of the Selection Process Relative to Their Competitors (%), 2014

Figure 4: If You Had the Choice Again Would You Choose the Same Manufacturer? (%), 2014

Figure 5: Do You Anticipate Switching to a Different Supplier Within the Next Five Years? (%), 2014

Figure 6: Areas of Improvement for Equipment Suppliers

Figure 7: Average Ratings for Key Factors When Choosing an Equipment Supplier, 2014

Figure 8: Average Ratings for Key Factors When Choosing an Equipment Supplier by Mine Type, 2014

Figure 9: Average Ratings for Key Factors When Choosing a Supplier (Part 1), 2014

Figure 10: Average Ratings for Key Factors When Choosing a Supplier (Part 2), 2014

Figure 11: Ratings for Key Factors When Choosing an Equipment Supplier by Company Size, 2014

Figure 12: 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 – Customer Satisfaction Ratings and Average Importance Ratings (Part 1), 2014

Figure 21: Caterpillar – Customer Satisfaction Ratings and Average Importance Ratings (Part 2), 2014

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

Figure 23: Joy Global – Customer Satisfaction Ratings and Average Importance Ratings (Part 1), 2014

Figure 24: Joy Global – Customer Satisfaction Ratings and Average Importance Ratings (Part 2), 2014

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

Figure 26: Komatsu – Customer Satisfaction Ratings and Average Importance Ratings (Part 1), 2014

Figure 27: Komatsu – Customer Satisfaction Ratings and Average Importance Ratings (Part 2), 2014

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

Figure 29: Sandvik – Customer Satisfaction Ratings and Average Importance Ratings (Part 1), 2014

Figure 30: Sandvik – Customer Satisfaction Ratings and Average Importance Ratings (Part 2), 2014

Figure 31: Atlas Copco – Breakdown of Respondents by Mine Type and Mineral (%), 2014

Figure 32: Atlas Copco – Customer Satisfaction Ratings and Average Importance Ratings (Part 1), 2014

Figure 33: Atlas Copco – Customer Satisfaction Ratings and Average Importance Ratings (Part 2), 2014

Figure 34: Leading Suppliers by Share of Respondents – Surface Equipment (%), 2014

Figure 35: Leading Suppliers by Share of Respondents – Software (%), 2014

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

Figure 37: Areas Where Main Suppliers Differentiated Themselves as Part of the Selection Process Relative to Their Competitors (%), 2014

Figure 38: 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 39: 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 40: If you had the Choice Again would you Choose the Same Manufacturer?

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

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

Figure 43: Do you Anticipate Switching to a Different Supplier within the Next Five Years?, By Current Supplier Overall Rating

Figure 44: Areas for Improvement for Equipment Suppliers, 2014

Figure 45: Areas for Improvement for Equipment Suppliers by Company Size, 2014

Figure 46: Areas for Improvement for Equipment Suppliers by Commodity, 2014

Figure 47: Survey Respondents by Country (%), 2014

Figure 48: Survey Respondents by Mine Type (%), 2014

Figure 49: Survey Respondents by Commodity (%), 2014

Figure 50: Equipment Supplied by Respondents’ Major Equipment Supplier by Type (%), 2014

Figure 51: Equipment Type Sourced by Commodity (%), 2014

Figure 52: Equipment Type Sourced by Mine Type (%), 2014

Figure 53: Equipment Supplied by Respondents’ Major Equipment Supplier, by Manufacturer (%), 2014

    Pricing

Discounts available for multiple purchases.

reportstore@globaldata.com
+44 20 7947 2745

Join our mailing list

Saved reports