Time to get serious about change - GM's bailout negotiations GM is in intense negotiations with bondholders, employees (via the

union) and the government over its future. At stake is nothing less than the future of America's largest auto company. A company that saw revenue decline more than 40% in January after deciding in December to idle most of its manufacturing plants. The negotiations are focusing on whether GM can be competitive. But, unfortunately,GM seems to be directing that discussion toward cost reductions (read article here). As if all GM needs to do is somehow lower costs and it will be competitive with Toyota, which displaced GM atop the global auto industry as the world's largest in January. What customers globally know is that the issue at GM isn't just about cost (which can pretty much be translated into "union contract busting.") Customers want quality products that fit their needs, produced at high quality, with low service costs, and low cost of use(interpret - higher mileage.) It's been 20 years since the yen/dollar valuation gave Japanese manufacturers lower cost of production - and yet year after year Toyota, Honda, Subaru and Suzuki keep growing share while U.S. manufacturers keep declining. One of the more difficult to understand articles this week was the lauding of GM's vicechairman Bob Lutz. Mr. Lutz is more than 70 years old! He might well have been a great executive 35 years ago (in 1974) when he was an up-and-coming executive. But my how the world, and the auto industry, has changed since then. I'll never forget watching him interviewed on television about the Tesla (the electric sports car) and seeing him laugh. He literally dismissed Tesla as unimportant - not up to the standards of GM and it's industry leadership. At the time my thought was "I think you'd be a lot smarter to listen to these new guys than be so smug and ignore them." Of course, in short order, Toyota's hybrid vehicles helped lead Toyota past GM, and the approach of Mr. Lutz was looking less and less viable. Good bye, and good riddance, would be a better report for an executive who not only stayed around too long and didn't "save" GM, but ignored powerful competitors while trying to defend an outdated Success Formula. It is time for GM, and the other domestic auto competitors, to move on. The old Success Formula has failed. It's not about just doing less well, with GM stock valued at $2.70 and the negotiation about converting bondholders to equity holders in order to get more

government bailout money --- the game is over. What worked for GM in the 1950s, and most of the 1960s, doesn't work any more. And the success of Toyota and Honda demonstrates that. America doesn't need Bob Lutz (and his compadres) any more - may he enjoy his retirement (which is a lot more secure than the thousands of GM retirees that weren't executives). If investors, employees and vendors of the American auto industry are to avoid even more downfall it is time to develop an entirely new game - with new leaders. GM (and its brethren) need to quit villifying unions as the "boogeymen" causing all their problems. Management signed those union agreements - and if they weren't viable management should have dealt with them. The employees of GM - and all the citizens of Detroit, southeastern Michigan and northwester Ohio as well as the extended midwest have a vested interest in the succes of this industry. They will agree to leadership which helps them succeed. Continue the old "company vs. union" battles will do no good. Leadership needs to be focused on offering an approach to delivering products that will energize employees and ucstomers alike. GM must define a new future. Not one based upon a series of cost cuts - which will be matched by competitors. GM needs to demonstrate it can change its view of R&D, product development, customer finance and distribution to meet current customer needs. For GM to be viable, management must demonstrate it knows that tweaking the old model is insufficient. It's time to develop an "entirely new car company" as Roger Smith said when he funded the launch of Saturn. And America's banks, investors and auto buyers all know this. Increasingly at GM, Disrupting the old business model seems unlikely. Current management is so Locked-in it continues searching for ways to Defend the old model, in spite of deteriorating results at the nadir of failure. If America is to invest in this company, it deserves new management which is able to develop a new company that can truly compete. It is time to demand new leaders who are not the "old guard", but instead leaders who are able to bring new products to market that are competitive by implementing White Space where these new products can be launched through new distribution. For America to keep supporting GM the company needs to move beyond old arguments about labor costs, and get serious about changing its product line and

distribution system as well as its legacy employment costs. It's possible to turn around GM - but only if management will abandon its Defend & Extend Management practices and instead use Disruptions to open White Space for a better company to emerge. .. Timp pentru a obine serios despre schimbare - negocieri de salvare GM GM este n negocieri intense cu deintorii de obligaiuni, angajai (prin unirea) i Guvernul asupra viitorului su. Miza este nimic mai puin dect viitorul cea mai mare companie auto din America. O companie care a vzut veniturile declin mai mult de 40% n luna ianuarie dup ce a decis n decembrie la modul n cele mai multe dintre unitatile sale de productie. Negocierile se concentreaz asupra dac GM poate fi competitiv. Dar, din pcate, GM pare a fi conducerea c discuia spre reducerea costurilor (citeste articolul aici). Ca i cum toate GM trebuie s fac este oarecum costuri mai mici i va fi competitiv cu Toyota, care a deplasat GM in varful industriei auto la nivel mondial ca fiind mai mare din lume n ianuarie. Ceea ce clienii tiu la nivel global este c problema de la GM nu este doar despre costul (care poate fi destul de mult tradus n "busting contract de uniune.") Clienii doresc produse de calitate care se potrivesc nevoilor lor, produs la nalt calitate, cu costuri de service reduse, i costuri reduse de utilizare (interpreta -. kilometraj mai mare) Au trecut 20 de ani de yeni / dolar evaluare a dat producatorii japonezi costuri mai mici de producie - i totui, an dup an, Toyota, Honda, Subaru si Suzuki pstreze cota de cretere n timp ce productorii din SUA pstra n scdere . Una dintre cele mai greu de neles de articole n aceast sptmn a fost lauding de vice-presedintele GM, Bob Lutz. Dl Lutz este mai mult de 70 de ani! El ar putea foarte bine fi fost un executiv mare acum 35 de ani (n 1974), cnd a fost un executiv up- i-vin. Dar cum mi lumea, i industria auto, sa schimbat de atunci. Nu voi uita niciodat privindu-l intervievat la televizor despre Tesla (masina sport electrica) i s-l vd rd. El a respins literalmente Tesla ca lipsit de importan - nu se ridic la standardele de GM si este lider in industrie. La momentul gndul meu a fost "Cred c ar fi mult mai inteligent pentru a asculta aceste tipi dect s fie att de elegant i le ignore." Desigur, n scopul de scurt, vehicule hibride Toyota a ajutat la Toyota trecut GM, i abordarea de domnul Lutz a fost n cutarea mai puin i mai puin viabile. La revedere, i bine c am scpat, ar fi un

raport mai bun pentru un executiv care au rmas nu doar n jur de prea mult timp i nu a "salva" GM, dar a ignorat competitori puternici n timp ce ncerca s-i apere o formul de succes depite. Este timpul pentru GM, i cu ali concureni auto interne, pentru a trece mai departe. Vechi Formula succesului nu a reuit. Nu este vorba doar despre a face mai bine, cu stocul de GM n valoare de 2.70 dolari i de negociere cu privire la conversia deintorii de obligaiuni deintorilor de capitaluri proprii, n scopul de a obine mai multe bailout bani de la guvern --- jocul este de peste. Ceea ce a lucrat pentru GM n 1950, iar cele mai multe dintre anii 1960, nu funcioneaz nici mai mult. i succesul de Toyota i Honda demonstreaz c. America nu are nevoie de Bob Lutz (i tovarii si) mai - el se pot bucura de pensionare (care este mult mai sigur dect mii de pensionari modificate genetic care nu au fost directori). Dac investitori, angajai i furnizori din industria auto americana sunt pentru a evita chiar mai mult cderea este timp pentru a dezvolta un joc cu totul nou - cu noi lideri. GM (i fraii si) trebuie s renune la sindicate villifying ca "boogeymen" cauzeaz toate problemele lor. De gestionare a semnat aceste acorduri sindicale - i n cazul n care nu au fost management viabile ar fi ocupat cu ei. Angajaii de la GM - i toi cetenii din Detroit, sud-estul Michigan i Ohio northwester precum i extins Midwest - au un interes legitim n succesul acestei industrii. Ei vor fi de acord s conducere, care i ajut s reueasc. Continuarea vechi "companiei vs sindicat" lupte va face nici un bine. Conducerea trebuie s se concentreze pe oferirea de o abordare la livrarea de produse care va energiza angajaii i ucstomers deopotriv. GM trebuie s defineasc un nou viitor. Nu unul bazat pe o serie de reduceri de cost care va fi compensat de ctre concureni. GM trebuie s demonstreze se poate schimba punctul de vedere al R & D, dezvoltarea produsului, finane client i de distribuie pentru a satisface nevoile actuale ale clientilor. Pentru GM pentru a fi viabil, managementul trebuie s demonstreze tie c testeaza modelul vechi este insuficient. Este timp pentru a dezvolta o "companie de masina cu totul noua", ca Roger Smith a spus atunci cnd a finanat lansarea de Saturn. i bncile America, investitorii si cumparatorii auto tii toate astea.

Din ce n ce la GM, distrugnd modelul de afaceri vechi pare puin probabil. Actuala conducere este att de blocat-in se continua cautare de moduri de a apra modelul vechi, n ciuda deteriorarea rezultatelor la nadir de eec. Daca America este de a investi n aceast companie, merit o nou conducere, care este capabil de a dezvolta o noua companie care poate concura cu adevrat. Este timpul de a cere noi lideri care nu sunt "vechea gard", ci lideri care sunt capabili de a aduce pe pia produse noi, care sunt competitive prin implementarea spaiu alb n care aceste produse noi pot fi lansate prin noua distribuie. Pentru America de a pstra sprijinirea GM compania are nevoie pentru a trece dincolo de vechile argumente cu privire la costurile forei de munc, i de a lua serios despre schimbarea liniei sale de produse i sistem de distribuie, precum i costurile sale de angajare existente. Este posibil s se ntoarc GM - dar numai dac managementul va renuna la practicile sale apra i extinde de management i de a folosi n loc Intreruperile pentru a deschide White Space pentru o societate mai bun s apar.