WSJ: GM Engineer Says Quality Remains 'Achilles' Heel'

[Simon says]

GM Engineer Says Quality Remains 'Achilles' Heel'
By SHARON TERLEP

DETROIT—The head of engineering at General Motors Co. said Thursday that product quality remains an "Achilles' heel" for GM amid a push by the auto maker's board to improve customer satisfaction.

Indeed, quality concerns have led GM Chairman Ed Whitacre to ask the company's engineers to quiz the nearly 200 U.S. customers who returned GM cars under a recent money-back guarantee promotion about the reasons for their dissatisfaction.

Quality has been a longstanding issue for GM and poses a potential hurdle for Mr. Whitacre's efforts to reinvent the auto maker and recapture lost market share. A recent Consumer Reports survey found that the company's vehicles were less reliable overall than rival models from Ford Motor Co., Honda Motor Co. and Toyota Motor Corp.

"That was very disappointing to me," Mark Reuss, vice president, global vehicle engineering, told reporters. "The reliability piece has been an Achilles' heel during my whole career at GM."

The admission and Mr. Whitacre's push mark a change in tone for GM, which has maintained its quality problem was mainly one of perception, and recently touted its vehicles with an advertising campaign with the slogan "May The Best Car Win."

Mr. Reuss said quality issues at GM are deep-seated and require cultural change. GM has had more success improving safety and performance of its vehicles, but he said reliability remains a sticking point. He said some company engineers have at times been afraid to report problem for fear their jobs would be threatened, resulting in glitches showing up when cars hit the market.

Mr. Reuss said he plans to meet with GM engineers Friday to help change that thinking. "We've told people to stop worrying about their jobs and start worrying about the products," he said.

The executive said that Mr. Whitacre requested, at a recent meeting, that GM find out why some customers had returned GM vehicles. A total 193 customers returned GM cars in the U.S. under the money-back promotion "I don't know how many people we have to call and ask why they didn't like our vehicle, but it's something we haven't done [before] and should [have]," Mr. Reuss said.

for more go HERE

[All-Or-Nothing]

So how many people opted for the return plan. Wonder what the return percentage would be for that group.

[WishIhadatruck]

Some vehicles launch with issues but they get corrected and others just seem to go on forever until the engine or platform is replaced. What % of people have had a clunking steering column or a leaky intake manifold gasket? I just heard this week someone talking about a steering column clunk on a new Impala. I think their problems come from multiple issues within the company. The good news is they have made some excellent cars lately (Malibu) where the quality is top notch. They just need to execute all cars like that.

[Bejeweled]

This really comes as no surprise to anyone who has owned many vehicles.

[Buick61]

Quick Family Car History:

61 LeSabre - NOT JUNK
88 Bonneville - Junk
91 DeVille - Junk
91 Vette ZR1 - Semi Junk
98 Malibu - Junk
00 L-Series - Semi Junk
00 Vette - Junk
06 G6 - Semi Junk
07 SRX - NOT JUNK

Finally GM is getting back to where they started.

[jaydee]

Pretty misleading title. If you read carefully he says "The reliability piece has been an Achilles' heel during my whole career at GM". Seems like someone had a mind to write yet another negative GM article and was waiting for the perfect quote to take out context. 193 returned vehicles out of how many they've sold is extremely low. Not only that, but it doesn't even say that the people who returned the car was due to low quality. There are a dozen reasons to return a car.

It's like writing an article on how Ford's stock is down $0.20 today and ignoring the overall market as well as performance this week up until today. Lame.

[jaydee]

Originally Posted by Buick61

Quick Family Car History:

61 LeSabre - NOT JUNK
88 Bonneville - Junk
91 DeVille - Junk
91 Vette ZR1 - Semi Junk
98 Malibu - Junk
00 L-Series - Semi Junk
00 Vette - Junk
06 G6 - Semi Junk
07 SRX - NOT JUNK

Finally GM is getting back to where they started.

Not nearly as long of a history but...

1995 Saturn SL - NOT JUNK (died @249k miles, all on original engine and clutch)
2002 Chevy Impala - Semi Junk, (traded in at 130k)
1996 Buick Riviera - NOT JUNK (163k, still going strong)

[Dr. Show-Me]

If GM wants customers back or conquest sales, they better come up with a way to counter this negative issue. Give people a long warranty so GM picks up the cost of lesser reliability.

[ne_one]

Originally Posted by jaydee

Pretty misleading title. If you read carefully he says "The reliability piece has been an Achilles' heel during my whole career at GM".

I also took issue with the fact that it implies that quality and reliability are the same benchmark. For me at least, quality is an indicator of value while reliability focuses on the ability to confidently get you from point A to point B.

It's disheartening to hear some employees felt there would be reprisals for pointing out issues. People who push the stop line button should be awarded not condemned. Definitely something from the old GM culture that has to go.

And someone had to think about contacting people who returned their vehicles yo ask them why? Good grief. Given the volume, Ed Whitacre could be talking to them personally and inviting them to the next focus group gathering.

[SullyND]

Originally Posted by Dr. Show-Me

If GM wants customers back or conquest sales, they better come up with a way to counter this negative issue.

The best thing for the domestics is for Toyonda to continue to devolve into old GM. My Dad had a Toyota that had zero problems and excellent customer service, went to an Olds with over 100 problems and awful service. Since then he's had only Lexus vehicles (save one Benz) and had excellent reliability and customer service. Is it fair to judge GM by a bad experience with a Trefeo? NO, but he's not. Lexus has given him no reason to look elsewhere. If Toyota continues to slip up then it would open up more ground for others.

[Buick61]

Originally Posted by jaydee

Not nearly as long of a history but...

1995 Saturn SL - NOT JUNK (died @249k miles, all on original engine and clutch)
2002 Chevy Impala - Semi Junk, (traded in at 130k)
1996 Buick Riviera - NOT JUNK (163k, still going strong)

Oh, I could have gone back through the '50s. I just started with cars my family had starting in 1988.

I did forget:

'93 Tracker - NOT JUNK.

[mbukukanyau]

If only 193 vehicles have been returned, GM should actually send out a person to wine and dine these folks and do an in depth interview with them as to exactly why they returned the vehicle, and go back and fix whatever the reason was, be it price, dealership experience, engine noise, too much power, poor plastics, etc...

[W.A.F.U.]

It amazes me that the OP would never post anything negative about Ford yet will do so against GM and then not expect to be labeled a troll...........

[Extreme4x4]

The problem is, that quality is not an easy fix. It is not just in the quality of parts from the suppliers, as it goes much deeper than that. The processes for quality have to be "baked in" from the beginning.

Thus, if the processes are in place, quality is not hit and miss. Any problems should be identified quickly, and fixed quickly. Also, all new vehicles need to have extensive quality holds, to ensure a good release.

One only has to look at all of the ridiculous little problems that the Camaro had at launch, to see that the correct process's are NOT in place.

Remember that it took Bill Ford 3-5 years to get this correct, in Ford. It is a slow process, but pays off big dividends.

W.A.F.U., what the hell does the OP's name have to do with the jest of the article. The reality is there are quality issues............... and they need to be addressed.

[W.A.F.U.]

Originally Posted by Extreme4x4

W.A.F.U., what the hell does the OP's name have to do with the jest of the article. The reality is there are quality issues............... and they need to be addressed.

Nowhere did I state that the article was not true. Anybody with their eyes open can see GM is still lacking in the long term quality area. For that matter, so does Ford. How can I see that? Because I'm not in love with a car company and ready to defend them to the death even when they don't deserve it.

But if this had been a GM fanboy posting something negative about Ford, the Ford trolls would have been all over the OP and the fight would start. Instead we have a Ford fanboy posting a negative story about GM and soon enough, the fight will start.

I'm simply tired of the Ford trolls provoking nonsense by posting negative things about GM. If it's somebody who's open minded and can reasonably discuss things then great but the OP is most certainly not.