Here's a comparison that Blue Origin themselves made in an internal memo in 2018: https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/10/revealed-the-secret-... The article has 3 pages, make sure to check out the whole thing.

For example:

“Cost as a design constraint and important variable is embraced by their culture, instead of being viewed as an evil metric that leads to a sub-optimal outcome," one [Blue Origin] executive wrote [about SpaceX].

"I believe we study a little too much and do too little," one [Blue Origin] executive wrote. "More test [rather than] more analysis will allow us to progress more quickly, iterate, and eventually succeed."

I would have assumed SpaceX vs Boeing (Starliner) would have been a more relevant comparison. Boeing generally tends to outsource as much as they can.

SpaceX does business with the DoD, which can give them supply-chain priority over everyone else for so-called "DPAS rated" purchase orders. [1] If I'm fulfilling a rated order, I not only have the ability, but the obligation, to inform my suppliers that I'm at the front of the line.

Tesla, presumably, isn't able to play that card.

1: https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/other-areas/strategic-indu...

They didn't have that for all the development of Falcon 9. SpaceX deliberately vertically integrated and moved to automotive and other suppliers because space suppliers were so bad.

I would be surprised if they have to use this process all that often, specially now that they have reduced construction rates.