Some variation in tiering
methodology across plans persisted, likely because plans had the option to use supplemental quality measures or to adjust efficiency performance scores to reflect their own contracted rates.
For the last five years, the assumption that supplier tiering
would remain the dominant industry model has led many major automotive suppliers to invest heavily in front-end R & D for their major segment areas and to significantly expand their technical and program management capabilities.
Most industry analysis focused on the trend towards supplier tiering
and the development of the "Systems Integrators" or "Tier Ones." The prevailing theory at the time was that two or three suppliers would dominate each key component/system segment (e.g., seating, bumper modules, etc.,) and the rest of the supply base would be relegated to second-class citizenship by being a Tier 2 or 3.
What's more, in the absence of tight process and policy control, the risk of under-provisioning critical data has far outweighed the savings attributed to tiering
. As a result, in order to simplify operations and certify that service levels for mission-critical data are met, the default option for most IT departments has been to deliver a single class of high-performance, high-availability service to all data.