Dr. Maccoby participates in a Weekly Forum on Washington Post.com called "On Leadership". I am compiling all of his responses to the weekly questions here.

12/8/08: What More Could Auto Execs Have Done? They came up with specific turnaround plans, got the union to agree to concessions, offered to cut their own pay and then drove themselves to Washington. In leadership terms, what else could the Big Three chiefs have done, internally or externally, to convince Congress to take the political risk to help them avoid bankruptcy?

Change The Culture

Of course, the three CEOs would have been more appealing if they had been less arrogant and more penitent the first time they came to Congress. They got the message the second time and played the leadership role well.

But the question we should be asking is whether even with loans, union concessions and turnaround plans, these companies can become competitive with Toyota and Honda. So far, they have not presented a convincing plan.

In his Dec. 8 cover story in Fortune, "GM And Me," Alex Taylor writes:

Over the years the company has tried to reform itself any number of times, but it has been doomed by what made it once successful: doing it the GM way. Ask Rick Wagoner why GM isn't more like Toyota, and he'd tell you, "We're playing our own game-- taking advantage of our unique heritage and strengths," Turns out GM should have forgotten that and become more like Toyota.

But it is extremely difficult to change the culture of a large company. It took IBM about 10 years, with exceptional leadership from Lou Gerstner and Sam Palmisano, to make the company customer focused and collaborative. I don't see how GM can survive without that kind of transformational leadership.

By Michael Maccoby | December 8, 2008; 3:40 PM ET | Category: Economic crisis

| TMG Home | PTWC | Articles | Books | Contact Info | Comments |

This web site is being maintained by Maria