Cover Image
市場調查報告書

亞洲的礦山機器部門的產業的成功與維持:2015年

Winning and Retaining Business in the Asian Mining Equipment Sector, 2015

出版商 GlobalData 商品編碼 325021
出版日期 內容資訊 英文 59 Pages
訂單完成後即時交付
價格
Back to Top
亞洲的礦山機器部門的產業的成功與維持:2015年 Winning and Retaining Business in the Asian Mining Equipment Sector, 2015
出版日期: 2015年02月26日 內容資訊: 英文 59 Pages
簡介

本報告提供亞洲的礦山機器部門的客戶的偏好調查分析,礦山管理者,採購管理者,其他決策者的採訪為基礎,選擇供應商的優先順序,供應商的業績,滿意度等相關的系統性資訊。

第1章 摘要整理

第2章 選擇供應商的客戶的優先順序

  • 簡介
  • 選擇供應商的主要要素
  • 摘要

第3章 供應商的業績和主要成功因素

  • 簡介
  • 供應商整體業績
  • 客戶的重要性相關的個別供應商的業績
  • 主要供應商:各類別
  • 主要供應商的基準
  • 主要製造商:設備各類型
  • 供應商的差異化

第4章 客戶維繫與主要的改善領域

  • 簡介
  • 銷售後的供應商滿意度
  • 對競爭群組的主要供應商客戶的評估
  • 今後5年以內的轉換預測
  • 主要供應商率
  • 產品與服務提高的主要領域

第5章 行動計劃與建議

第6章∼第8章 附錄

圖表

目錄
Product Code: MMIN0009MR

This report provides a detailed analysis of customer preferences in the Asian mining sector, focusing on the factors that influence purchasing decisions and the performance of major equipment suppliers. The analysis is based on Timetric's extensive survey of 1156 mine managers, procurement managers and other key decision-makers.

Areas of analysis include:

  • Customer priorities when buying mining equipment, with ratings of the importance of 16 separate factors for customers when choosing mining equipment, including cost factors, supplier attributes and product attributes.
  • Ratings of existing suppliers across the same factors, identifying best-performing suppliers and how well suppliers performed versus the importance of each factor.
  • In-depth analysis of the major suppliers, Caterpillar, Komatsu, L&T and BEML, including their overall performance ratings and their ratings for each of the factors relative to its importance.
  • Rankings of the leading suppliers for each equipment type, with respondents indicating who they viewed as the top suppliers in Asia for trucks, excavators, loaders, shovels, dozers, drills, continuous miners, engines, tyres, pumps and mining software.
  • Insight into the likelihood of switching supplier and key action points for suppliers for product and service improvements required.

Summary

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
  • L&T 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 suppliers' reputation
  • Customers in Asia are happy with their current supplier but are open to change in the long term
  • Product quality was the stand out area identified for improvement

Scope

The survey is based on responses from 115 senior managers and decision makers at operating Asian mines, responsible for the purchase of equipment for plant and mine operations, along with its consumables. Survey respondents came from 7 different countries: India, Indonesia, the Philippines, Pakistan, Vietnam, Mongolia and Thailand. This included 6 different commodity groups and a range of surface and underground mining operations.

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.

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. Bharat Earth Movers Ltd (BEML)
    • 3.5.3. Komatsu
    • 3.5.4. Atlas Copco
    • 3.5.5. Larsen & Toubro Ltd (L&T)
    • 3.5.6. Volvo
  • 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 in 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 Timetric
  • 8.4. About Timetric
  • 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 the Same Manufacturer?
  • Table 4: Average Importance Ratings for Key Factors when Choosing an Equipment Supplier, 2014
  • Table 5: Average Importance Ratings for 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 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 for 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: BEML - Breakdown of Respondents by Mine Type and Mineral (%), 2014
  • Figure 23: BEML - Customer Satisfaction Ratings and Average Importance Ratings (Part 1), 2014
  • Figure 24: BEML - 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: Atlas Copco - Breakdown of Respondents by Mine Type and Mineral (%), 2014
  • Figure 29: Atlas Copco - Customer Satisfaction Ratings and Average Importance Ratings (Part 1), 2014
  • Figure 30: Atlas Copco - Customer Satisfaction Ratings and Average Importance Ratings (Part 2), 2014
  • Figure 31: L&T - Breakdown of Respondents by Mine Type and Mineral (%), 2014
  • Figure 32: L&T - Customer Satisfaction Ratings and Average Importance Ratings (Part 1), 2014
  • Figure 33: L&T - Customer Satisfaction Ratings and Average Importance Ratings (Part 2), 2014
  • Figure 34: Volvo - Breakdown of Respondents by Mine Type and Mineral (%), 2014
  • Figure 35: Volvo - Customer Satisfaction Ratings and Average Importance Ratings (Part 1), 2014
  • Figure 36: Volvo - Customer Satisfaction Ratings and Average Importance Ratings (Part 2), 2014
  • Figure 37: Leading Suppliers by Share of Respondents - Surface Equipment (%), 2014
  • Figure 38: Leading Suppliers by Share of Respondents - Software (%), 2014
  • Figure 39: Leading Suppliers by Share of Respondents - Underground Equipment (%), 2014
  • Figure 40: Areas Where Main Suppliers Differentiated Themselves as Part of the Selection Process Relative to Their Competitors (%), 2014
  • Figure 41: 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 42: 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 43: If You had the Choice Again, Would you Choose the Same Manufacturer?
  • Figure 44: View of Main Mobile Mining Equipment Supplier vs Peers in the Market, 2014
  • Figure 45: Do you Anticipate Switching to a Different Supplier in the Next Five Years?
  • Figure 46: Areas for Improvement for Equipment Suppliers, 2014
  • Figure 47: Areas for Improvement for Equipment Suppliers by Company Size, 2014
  • Figure 48: Areas for Improvement for Equipment Suppliers by Commodity, 2014
  • Figure 49: Survey Respondents by Country (%), 2014
  • Figure 50: Survey Respondents by Mine Type (%), 2014
  • Figure 51: Survey Respondents by Commodity (%), 2014
  • Figure 52: Equipment Supplied by Respondents' Major Equipment Supplier by Type (%), 2014
  • Figure 53: Equipment Supplied by Respondents' Major Equipment Supplier, by Manufacturer (%), 2014
Back to Top