For a company that’s crowing about its sales growth and profitability, General Motors has been doing the kind of executive shuffling we became accustomed to seeing in the bad old days before the bailout. Already this week, freshly-minted Global Marketing boss Joel Ewanick put his former Hyundai colleague Chris Perry in charge of Chevy’s US marketing, and transferred Buick marketing duties from John Schwegman to former Volt marketer Tony DiSalle. The head of Onstar, Chris Preuss, has also stepped down this week, leaving former Sprint Nextel and Verizon executive Linda Marshall in charge. And today came the big one: 49 Year-Old Mary Barra has replaced Tom Stephens at the top of GM’s new-product development team as Stephens ascends to the new position of Chief Technology Officer.
These changes come straight from the top, as CEO Dan Akerson created the chief global marketing officer and chief global technology officer positions, requiring other executives like Barra and Perry to move up in the company. But will “global” czars actually catch GM up on new product development, one of its major deficits vis-a-vis the competition? More importantly, will Barra simply become the latest GM lifer to bump up against the Peter Principle? The fact that she’s leaving Human Resources to take on The General’s most important task certainly has the scent of Old GM’s corporate politics on it…
In fairness, it should be noted that Barra’s experience at GM is not limited to HR work. As GM’s presser puts it
Recognized for bringing diverse groups together for a common purpose, Barra was appointed vice president, Global Human Resources in 2009, to initiate change in the company’s culture during the largest restructuring in GM’s history. Prior to this appointment, she had been vice president, Global Manufacturing Engineering. Barra has also held a number of engineering and staff positions, including plant manager, Detroit Hamtramck Assembly Plant; executive director of Competitive Operations Engineering; and general director of Internal Communications for GM North America.
Or, as CEO Dan Akerson put it
Her broad experience in engineering, manufacturing and staff functions, combined with the ability to collaborate and build strong relationships will enhance the company’s ability to deliver the products today’s consumers demand.
Besides, it’s not as if the weight of new-product decisions will be on Barra’s shoulders alone, as Bloomberg reports
The new product development chief’s job will be to work closely with Stephens and global Chief Marketing Officer Joel Ewanick to get a consumer voice in GM’s future models and decide which technologies should be used in those cars, Barra, 49, said in a telephone interview. The three will work as a team to develop GM’s product strategy, she said.
Since GM has admitted that it is a year behind the competition in its new product development, these three executives are going to have to work well together. And because Barra is relatively inexperienced, analyst reaction has been decidedly mixed. Jim Hall of 2953 Analytics sees the upside as
Managing GM is about getting rid of fiefdoms. Cross-breeding executives could be a way of nuking the fiefdoms.
Meanwhile, Maryann Keller of Maryann Keller Associates worries
The appointment is strange. Why does GM have anything that people are excited about? Because of Bob Lutz. I’m not sure that [Barra] has the background for this job.
We’ll certainly be watching with interest.
I guess another question is, will putting an engineer in charge of new product development assuage skeptics that future products will be made to the highest possible quality standards?
The last quote from Maryann Keller I don’t really get. Crediting Lutz for all that is good in GM is pretty shortsighted to me. After all, Lutz made a lot of mistakes while he was there, the Solstice/Sky, all of Pontiac (the American BMW) and just about every mid-sized family sedan made by GM. Somehow thtoughout his career lutz managed to take credit for the stuff that worked and pass blame off to others. Before the bankruptcy he never said a bad word about the dymanic duo of incompetence Fritz and Rick. He just has always struck me as one of those guys everyone has worked with who talked a lot but never really did anything except put himself in front of a project that was succeeding and claim credit for it. That and he sucked up to the automotive press so that they all carried water for him. Actually Ms. Keller’s reference to Barra as not Lutz gives me hope that she may be ok in the job. An actual worker rather than a dillittante in GM upper management is a good change.
Agree. Lutz, rich from birth, with his millions in his pocket, never needing job security, had a chance to really stick his neck out and force change at GM, but he didn’t. In the end, Lutz is only in it for Lutz. He’s far from a Statesman. And, he’s just not that good at business decisions. Hmm, perhaps that’s why he never forced change; deep inside he knew he was a pumped up phony. I remember a quote from someone who was around him, wrote about him, saying: “His need for attention was exhausting.”
Unbelieveable, HR director now in charge of product devlopment, only at GM.
“Meet the new boss, same as the old boss, we do get fooled again!”
and transferred Buick marketing duties… to former Volt marketer Tony DiSalle.
WooHoo!!! Look out, world! Watch for Buick’s market share to skyrocket in 3, 2, ehhh 6, 7, 23…
While lots of people have said that the feds should have let Chrysler fail, and concentrated on GM, I disagree. This company is the one that should have been wound down, or put through a real bankruptcy to give the poor carcass a fighting chance. It’s just plain embarrassing to watch this once great company in it’s death throes. I remember when General Motors made the most aspirational cars in the world; ’65-’67 Corvettes, almost any Buick Riviera, the original Olds Toronado, ’67-’69 Eldorado, ’66 GTO, ’67 Camaro-Firebird. Makes me wanna cry, and I’m a Chrysler fanboy. I can only hope someone who really loves cars gets in control of this trainwreck and puts it on the right path again.
Agreed. The fact that Marchionne came in and completely tore up Chrysler’s (and Fiat’s) management structure, while GM’s infamously inept corporate structure survived mostly in tact, really says a lot. Akerson may well be an outsider, but he certainly seems like just another fourteenth floor stooge to me.
The media and the mouth-breathing fanboys would never believe it, but I think Chrysler’s in much better shape for the future.
As one of the older buyers in the market, I have no fond recollection of any “glory years” of the Big 3. All I have in my memory are the “utterly shitty years” that I had to endure from the 1970s onward. That is the heritage of the Big-3 for me, and probably for most of the new-car-buyer demographics today. I’m happy to report that I feel Ford and GM are definitely competitive players again, and very superior in many ways, but this eternal reference to the glorious past needs to be put to bed. It’s irrelevant to most of the new car buyers.
@Buick6: “The fact that Marchionne came in and completely tore up Chrysler’s (and Fiat’s) management structure,”
What structure? On the Chrysler side, the Cerberus years found many of their folks jumping out of the windows to get away from that train wreck. I don’t recall where I read this now (I wish I did) but I had heard that some huge amount of Chrysler staff back during Cerberus’ reign were kiting their CV’s to anyone just to get out from there.
That said, with Marchionne, I think that Chrysler has a far better chance at survival than anyone ever expected in late 2008.
But GM just can’t catch a break. Some of this shuffling is (I think) just the regular churn of execs within a large corporation. If GM didn’t have the stigma of the government hanging around it’s neck, hardly anyone would notice. I’d think motorheads around the world would be happy that an engineer was in charge of product development again, but only in this environment, this is seen as a negative.
Really? Someone with broad experience (and not just finance) is in charge and this is bad?
Is the Keller quote supposed to read …. “Why doesn’t GM have anything that people are excited about? Because of Bob Lutz.”
From everything I’ve read over the years about Bob Lutz, I’m convinced that Bob Lutz’s most significant product has been the myth of Bob Lutz.
Doesn’t anybody remember GM before Lutz? Remember the company’s products (besides Suburbans and pickups) from around 2002? Have you ever driven a Malibu from the early 2000s?
I am not saying that Lutz walked on water, but he did bring in a fresh breath of outside air to a company that had become increasingly clueless about its product. GM’s current products are decently competitive. This was not true 6-10 years ago, and is largely due to Lutz’s influence. Sure, he misfired and created some vehicles that did not sell well, but he also led a product resurgence that nobody else at the company seemed to be capable of.
I have some serious concern about GM’s product situation. Among domestic competitors, Ford and Chrysler have both seen massive cultural changes and substantially improved products as a result. I have the bad feeling that GM’s best product years are not in front of us, but were the last few years leading up to the bankruptcy.
GM will never succeed because they quite simply have no one who knows how to sell cars. that’s the bottom line and has been for years. amazing for a car company wouldn’t you say? I could increase their sales by 500,000 using the very same products now on the lots, and reduce costs doing it, but will they listen? never.
Buickman,
You believe it’s the inability to sell cars, and not the fact that GM leadership steadfastly refuses to acknowledge the insular culture has hampered better ideas for design, mfg process, getting creative with warranty coverage, etc?
jkross22,
yes it’s the lack of understanding retail automotive that is at the root of GM’s troubles. the things you mention are also of importance but the critical issue is knowing how to stimulate and fulfill demand. good things happen when cars are selling, problems seem far less troubling, the margins for error are not so rigid, and attitudes brighten, leading to improvements across the company.
jd
Mr. Buickman. How would you do what you suggest?
I would entirley change the marketing and have the plan already completely developed. I would bring tens of thousands of customers into the showroom without cost to the manufacturer, put them behind the wheel of our vehicles, and give the dealer opportunity for significant profit in sales and service. everyone who has seen my plan loves it, except GM of course.
“Cross-breeding executives.”
Those three words should never EVER share the same sentence. It makes me shudder every time I read it.
Her broad experience……..as would be heard in Monty Python,….say no more!
DIrty Harry talks about personnel managers.
I’ve never personally encountered Ms. Barra.
My experience @ GM was that women executives were academically bright, promoted often, had a wide range of experience, and little in-depth product design knowledge.
If she fits that description, it doesn’t bode well for the future.
Trash Lutz as you will but he knew what a good vehicle was.
I can’t comment on Ms. Barra’s aptitude for her new position, but based on Mr. Lutz’ body of work, the hits and misses were industry average.
To me, GM needs a mind that will find the big idea (ChryCo’s minivans, Ford’s original Taurus) and exploit it to its fullest. Lutz seemed to get bogged down in peripheral projects of questionable value that the motoring press loved and buyers largely ignored.
I don’t see replacing Tom Stephens with Mary Barra as a negative, yet. To me Tom Stephens was just another Old GM executive, unjustly promoted by the old boys club. Dead weight.
Chris Preuss leaving is interesting, too. I believe they ultimately sell/spin/cash out of OnStar anyway as it tries to create an aftermarket presence. Saw Preuss at the AutoNews World Congress – he was probably the most impressive speaker in terms of understanding his business
“Iceberg, right ahead!!!”
“Everybody, rearrange those chairs on the deck!!!”