"GM leaders promise, but don't deliver,"

[tgagneguam]

GM leaders promise, but don't deliver

Instead of meeting ambitious market share goals, executives simply move the goalposts

By John Schnapp / Special to The Detroit News

“Accountability” at General Motors is never having to say you’re sorry. The company exhibits a chronic habit of retroactively downplaying managerial commitments that have gone unfulfilled or simply exhibiting amnesia about them.

The six-month financials released this week, although revealing an encouraging second- quarter profit increase, suggests that GM is enroute to another of these familiar scenarios.

When the Rick Wagoner management team assumed leadership in 2000 it brought with it a “stretch target” to raise U.S. market share to 32 percent. At the time it was 29. As the company failed in its efforts to sustain even the 29, what seemed a serious corporate crusade was launched to regain that number.

Executives inserted “29” buttons in their lapels; 29 became a seemingly important number.

At least until actual market share, momentarily held more or less steady in the low 28s, began to crumble again. For the first six months of this year it is below 27 percent if one excludes Saab and Hummer.

So Vice Chairman and “product czar” Robert Lutz instead has moved the goalposts. Thirty would be nice, he told his audience at a recent Swiss gathering, but out in some undefined future and 29 isn’t so vital after all — 27 to 28 would be acceptable.

There's more...

[gmsickofan]

Why should one exclude Saab and HUMMER...?

[Ming]

Maybe they should include Suzuki, since GM owns GM Daewoo and a part of Suzuki, and much of Suzuki's recent success is based on GM Daewoo models.

[goblue1999]

Originally Posted by ilaoc77

yea, what's with the Exclusion?

And why are we hearing Mr. Lutz say that 27-28 is Acceptable? I'm not likein' the sound of that...

Market share is nice, but it doesn't pay the bills. Profit is what counts, and cash flow pays the pension/health care bills.

Europe must now retrench like the US has done since 1990. It is about time that the European arm felt the pain, especially the overpaid unproductive Germans.

[desmo9]

Originally Posted by goblue1999

Market share is nice, but it doesn't pay the bills. Profit is what counts, and cash flow pays the pension/health care bills.

Market share is an important metric, though. It tells us about GM's overcapacity, which is the biggest single threat to their profitability. The lower market share goes, the lower the profit will be ... unless they can right-size the company based on actual share. But the UAW has a way of stepping in and preventing them from being lean and competitive.

[gmsickofan]

I want to see GM take more advantage of its other worldwide brands, like in that other article on the ticker. GM won't gain market share in the US selling stuff that wouldn't be able to compete overseas.

[Canuck]

Scary to think 29 28 27 could even be considered as acceptable. Is this the same company the US Government once considered breaking up for controlling too much of the market. Ah the good old days.
The only way GM is going to fix itself is with world class products. I am surprised by this articles timing. GM seems to be righting itself, a few years ago this article would have made more sense.

[marinerbc]

Originally Posted by goblue1999

Market share is nice, but it doesn't pay the bills. Profit is what counts, and cash flow pays the pension/health care bills.

Europe must now retrench like the US has done since 1990. It is about time that the European arm felt the pain, especially the overpaid unproductive Germans.

I'm going to listen to this man. He's very smart. :p

Now the task is to build the perception, ever so slowly, that GM builds equal, or superior vehicles to the German ones. That will take a number of years, but it will happen, if it's allowed to. Let's hope that Wagoner and Lutz will be patient enough to wait for it to come about, without the bean counters halting the recovery in its tracks.