A couple of months ago, Bob Lutz asked for suggestions about how GM could start combatting the perception that their vehicles weren't competitive on quality, design, and performance. Many readers responded, as did I. My suggestions:
- Where are the other GM bloggers? How about encouraging a widespread campaign of transparent communication between people inside and outside GM. If they're out there, tell us about them. If not, why not? Like Bob Lutz, Robert Scoble is a powerful symbol of Microsoft's commitment to transparency, but the thousands of other bloggers in the company have created an impressive network of authentic voices. Would GM's lawyers allow this much free-ranging communication?
- How can customers talk to you? Start a publicity campaign, yesterday, encouraging people to tell you stories about their GM vehicles, past and present, good and bad, and get those on your Web site. The comments on the Fastlane Blog are loaded with great nuggets...use them more broadly. Put them into ads, put them in podcasts, get them on the news....Give customers a chance to design things, or write ads, like Boeing and Mercedes did.
- Give people a reason to give you a second chance. GM has a critical role in American history. Many, many people are angry with you: you let us down, took us for granted and skimmed the cream. But there's also something else besides the anger: national pride. You can't leverage your heritage without giving people a reason to give you a second chance. Apologize. Tell us you lost your way. We love redemption and if you let pepole know that you're aware that you've screwed up and made mistakes and are now asking for a second chance, you've got a hell of a lot better chance of them doing so than making believe the problem's been currency exchange rates or some other such nonsensical esoterica. Sure you're saddled with enormous healthcare costs and other legacy problems. So is Social Security. Let the country know why it should give a damn if you going under.
Now, GM's actually done it; launched a blog called, FYI.gmblogs.com. It's purpose?
While we are certainly happy with the conversation that the FastLane has created, for the most part, it has been the exclusive domain of some of our most senior executives, particularly Bob Lutz (most of us even call it Bob's Blog). Over the last few months we decided that we could add another blog to our portfolio; and that it could be even more grassroots, providing an opportunity for all GM employees to contribute in one way or another.
Our hope is that this will be an effective way to spread the conversation about GM; that we can continue to get better at listening and maintaining the dialogue, and ultimately, create products and services that not only meet your needs but are truly the best.
Smart. Welcome to the conversation.
<Psst...somebody get the lawyers out of the room!>
I hope you're wearing your seatbelts!
Tags: GM Fastlane Blog GM FYI Blog
My first thought is: Is GM *actually* competitive on quality, design, and performance?
Posted by: Jason Yip | April 20, 2006 at 05:39 AM
I think that's an excellent question, Jason. If you've not yet done so, I recommend you read this post referencing Lutz's thoughts about the issue.
Posted by: Tom Guarriello | April 20, 2006 at 06:26 AM
Ahh geez, now I've really gone and put my foot in it. Money and Banking post is up, Tom, and yer a featured player. =)
Posted by: fouro | April 20, 2006 at 05:18 PM
For your information Gamble-ogs dot com? A certain symmetry there.
Posted by: fouro | April 20, 2006 at 05:20 PM
Great post, 40...but I don't get the Gamble-ogs thing.
???
Posted by: Tom Guarriello | April 21, 2006 at 05:33 PM
I don't follow GM as closely as others so I couldn't really comment on personal experience for quality, design, and performance. I did use to own an '81 Camaro but that's quite a while ago.
So via Evolving Excellence (http://www.evolvingexcellence.com/blog/2006/04/life_in_the_pro.html), this article (http://money.cnn.com/2006/04/21/news/companies/pluggedin_fortune/index.htm?cnn=yes) suggests that the sales figures don't mean what Bob Lutz say they mean.
Posted by: Jason Yip | April 24, 2006 at 07:41 PM
Mike Dewitt and I sometimes make bad jokes out of the letter strings blogger uses to validate comments: FYI, pretty straigtforward. gmblogs, gamble-ogs. Wagering etc. One of those you had to be there things. =)
----
Jason, thats a good article, thanks.
1. Kicking the incentive habit
2. Kicking the fleet sales habit
3. Buyers who are upside down
Perhaps it all comes down to Detroit marginalizing itself the same way grocers did in the slotting and couponning wars. They too became fiercely intent on financial formula at the expense of their own margin-enhancing and brand-building knowledge. Bad news when grocers are better with a calculator than they are at helping assure fresh melons are on display.
Posted by: fouro | April 25, 2006 at 02:51 AM
Will General Motors and Ford merge? It almost happened once, in 1908,
when J.P. Morgan tried to put together a deal between four major car
makers: Ford, Buick, Olds, and Briscoe-Maxwell. The secret meeting
between the heads of those companies is retold in an excerpt from the
new book, "Billy, Alfred, and General Motors," published by AMACOM, at
http://tinyurl.com/nqf2x
What's amazing is that all the parties agreed to the merger -- even
Henry Ford. It looked like a done deal, then suddenly fell apart. The
reasons are complex, involving the psychology of self-made men vs.
schooled managers, distributed vs. central control, and inventors vs.
the financiers they hate but can't grow without.
The book is written by National Book Award nominee William Pelfrey. A
veteran freelance journalist and GM insider, Pelfrey recreates the
events of that day using obscure newspaper accounts, personal
letters, and other previously unpublished documents.
Posted by: Steve O'Keefe | May 08, 2006 at 04:26 AM