General Motors Death Watch 191: On the Fritz
Journalism professors counsel aspiring scribes to avoid deploying numbers in the first paragraph. It’s a sensible prohibition. Although statistics (a.k.a. facts) give journos the imprimatur of authority, nothing’s more narcoleptic than naked numerology. Which is just as well. My math skills are only slightly better than my ability to pilot a Gulfstream IV. But I know a man who regularly rides in the back of one of these airborne ego-carriers, and he’s an accountant. And the CEO of GM. For the weekend, anyway. The question is, who’s next?
Now that GM CEO Rick Wagoner’s mob have reported a $15.5b second financial quarter loss without offering a concrete, coherent plan to recover the company’s lost market share or staunch the arterial spray of red ink, Wagoner’s time’s up. COO Fritz Henderson is generally tipped for the top slot. While the financial community likes Fritz, handing Wagoner’s hand-picked successor the keys to the not-so-magic kingdom would be yet another monumental mistake.
Henderson is, nearasdammit, a Rick Wagoner clone. Though Henderson’s five years younger at 50, both men are accountants. Both men have Harvard MBA’s. Both men occupied GM’s Beancounter-in-Chief (CFO) position (i.e. managed GM’s inexorable decline). Both men can read a spreadsheet like walking a dog, but can’t spot a dog [product] if it pissed on their highly polished brogues.
Bottom line: Wagoner and Henderson define the world through numbers. While Global Product Veep Bob Lutz’ epic fail indicates that GM needs a red-blooded “car guy” at the helm like they need another Lambda-platformed crossover, now is the time for big ideas, not big numbers. (God knows there are plenty of THOSE hitting the fan.)
One of the big ideas that GM needs, as it goes into and through bankruptcy, is change. If Rick Wagoner’s tenure has taught us anything, it’s that GM’s business model is completely busted. The artist once known as the world’s largest automaker simply can’t continue designing, building and selling vehicles as they have for the last 100 years. Bureaucratic fiefdoms, union intransigence, crushing overheads, lackluster products, over-generous executive compensation, scattershot marketing, superfluous brands and more— EVERYTHING must go.
The salient fact here: Fritz Henderson’s worked for GM since Michael Jackson burned his scalp for Pepsi (1984). He is, in effect, a GM lifer. In terms of the old debate about whether radical reform is best accomplished from within or without, give me a break. The chances that an executive born of GM’s corporate culture will completely destroy that culture are about as great as the chances that Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe will suddenly champion genuine democracy.
Like Ford CEO Alan Mulally, The General’s next general should be ready, willing and able to abandon vast swathes of territory. In fact, GM’s leader must accept the fact that The General’s global dominance is dead, and it ain’t coming back for the next ten years (at least). By word and deed, he or she must communicate to the remaining employees that any aspirations in that direction are a dangerous fiction.
The new (yes new) goal: a return to profitability, whatever it takes. If GM must reduce itself to two brands, if GM must constrict until it can make its nut on a 10 percent market share, so be it. A piercing glimpse into the obvious, perhaps, but the wider point is that GM must experience a cultural revolution.
As always, real revolution starts with chaos. To liberate the talent locked-up within GM, the new CEO must fire ALL the suits nurtured by GM’s existing entropic structure. If Bob Lutz and Fritz Henderson are reluctant to unfurl their golden parachutes, the new CEO must push them out of RenCen's executive suite with extreme prejudice. As Machiavelli counseled, the cuts must be deep and profound, leaving not a single member of the old guard to undermine reform.
Many of TTAC’s Best and Brightest have suggested that GM should move its corporate HQ from Detroit to the left coast. This is exactly the kind of take-no-prisoners thinking GM’s new boss must bring to the job. Wagoner and Henderson are oblivious to symbolism’s importance to GM’s future, and the need to communicate forcefully and effectively to all of GM’s stakeholders. Unlike Ford’s Mulally or Chrysler’s Nardelli, GM’s new broom must be a great communicator.
Ultimately, GM’s slide into disaster is a story of personal failure, of board members and CEOs who couldn’t tell their ass from a hole in the ground. If the American automaker emerges from C11, it will be a story of the personal triumph of its new CEO. GM’s survival is not a question of numbers on a screen. It’s a question of leadership. Fritz Henderson is no more the man of the hour than Rick Wagoner. So, who is?
Potemkin on Aug 05, 2008
Anyone who thinks that getting rid of Wagoner and the top execs will change GM hasn't worked for them. GM is a failed organization from the top of the Ren Centre to the shop floor. Wagoner and his ilk have had 30 years to place like minded bullshit artists throughout the corp. These no talents owe their jobs to their no talents bosses who owe their bosses and so on all the way up the ladder. These peole are so entrenched in their fiefdoms that any turn around CEO will find backstabbers at every turn. Nothing short of a purge at all levels will change the culture. Sometimes you have to tear it all down and start over.
Redbarchetta on Aug 05, 2008Potemkin YES YES YES YES YES YOU ARE SO RIGHT. I have been trying to tell people that simple fact for years now and keep getting branded as unamerican, and insensitive and crap. If GM can fundamentally never be fixed why should we keep propping it up? Have we finally crossed that line and become a communist society and I didn't know it. Some times you have to just throw away the old and start fresh and brand new, no matter how painful it may seem, it's fo the best in the long run. Especially sinc this organization is irrepribly damaged. Why don't we spend the money we would be wasting on a bailout for the clown that is GM and set it aside as start up capital for true visionaries to make a great american auto business from the ashes of what is left. I would gladly let go of my tax dollars for that, there is a much better chance of long term success than continuing down the same path. Of course the entrenched powers that be would fight this to the death to keep their old and useless ways.
Latest Car ReviewsRead more
Latest Product ReviewsRead more
- 285exp I am quite sure that it is a complete coincidence that they have announced a $7k price increase the same week that the current administration has passed legislation extending the $7k tax credit that was set to expire. Yep, not at all related.
- Syke Is it possible to switch the pure EV drive on and off? Given the wonderful throttle response of an EV, I could see the desirability of this for a serious off-roader. Run straight ICE to get to your off-roading site, switch over the EV drive during the off-road section, then back to ICE for the road trip back home.
- ToolGuy Historical Perspective Moment:• First-gen Bronco debuted in MY1966• OJ Simpson Bronco chase was in 1994• 1966 to 1994 = 28 years• 1994 to now = 28 yearsFeel old yet?
- Ronnie Schreiber From where is all that electricity needed to power an EV transportation system going to come? Ironically, the only EV evangelist that I know of who even mentions the fragile nature of our electrical grid is Elon Musk. None of the politicians pushing EVs go anywhere near it, well, unless they are advocating for unreliable renewables like wind and solar.
- FreedMike I just don’t see the market here - I think about 1.2% of Jeep drivers are going to be sold on the fuel cost savings here. And the fuel cost savings are pretty minimal, per the EPA: https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/PowerSearch.do?action=noform&path=1&year1=2022&year2=2022&make=Jeep&baseModel=Wrangler&srchtyp=ymm&pageno=1&rowLimit=50Annual fuel costs for this vehicle are $2200 and $2750 for the equivalent base turbo-four model. I don’t get it.