Clueless on the Hill
As someone who works with many organizations on leadership, I can say – with tongue in cheek – that none of the CEOs of the Big Three auto makers will ever be accused of being leaders. To the contrary, they are a PR disaster. As their recent demonstration on Capital Hill revealed, they are too tone deaf, too old in their approaches, too rich, and too rusty to lead their companies out of a downward spiral.
GM’s Richard Wagoner, for example, apparently was only capable of speaking in the one-dimensional promotional jargon of a car salesman. He was not able to deliver specific and lucid answers to Congress. At one point, a congressman snapped at Wagoner to save the commercial for later.
Wagoner and his pals clearly were inadequately prepped.
Their presentations, their attitudes, suggested CEOs who were out of step or too arrogant to comprehend the climate in America today. Their appearance suggested CEOs who had not bothered to rehearse being humble.
None of the CEOs … and none of the PR people advising them … apparently anticipated the obvious question that was asked by Representative Gary Ackerman of New York, a question that will be remembered as perhaps the undoing of Detroit’s car industry:
“There’s a delicious irony in seeing private luxury jets flying into Washington, D.C., and people coming off of them with tin cups in their hands … It’s almost like seeing a guy show up at the soup kitchen in high-hat and tuxedo. . . . I mean, couldn’t you all have downgraded to first class or jet-pooled or something to get here?”
The CEOs sat there, looking at Ackerman, speechless.
Then, as Dana Milbank wrote in the The Washington Post, Congressman Brad Sherman of California joined in, “I’m going to ask the three executives here to raise their hand if they flew here commercial.” All still at the witness table. “Second,” he continued, “I’m going ask you to raise your hand if you’re planning to sell your jet . . . and fly back commercial.” More stillness. “Let the record show no hands went up,” Sherman said.
The issue of coming to a Washington congressional hearing in a corporate jet rather than a commercial flight may be the issue that derails Detroit’s plea for a financial handout. On the heels of the reported excesses by insurance giant, AIG, after it pocketed a chunk of bailout money, the move by the Detroit trio simply was not smart. What’s more, it was a demonstration of excess by highly paid CEOs that many Americans find appalling in these times of financial hardship. It is the antithesis of smart and enlightened leadership … and someone should have figured that out in advance of the trip to Washington.
I would not lend those guys the time of day.
By the way, I am old enough to remember that in the 1970s, the Big 3 auto makers came crying to Washington in similar fashion because they feared that better-made Japanese cars would lead to the ruin of Detroit. Didn’t happen.
Filed Under: Competitive Positioning • Featured • Leadership Principles
About the Author: David is a veteran communications strategist ... writer ... blogger ... online publisher ... and Emmy Award winning former CBS Network News correspondent. He lives in the Washington, D. C., area, and works worldwide.
Great post, David. I submitted a comment earlier, but I believe my computer crashed before it was saved. Anyway, it’s a great post. I made a similar post on my blog today — even though my headline is pretty outrageous, it makes a good point about the effect labor unions have on the Big 3. (That said, flying to D.C. on the corporate jet was just dumb.)
http://www.60SecondMarketer.com/blog
@Jamie Turner, Jamie,
Many thanks for your comment. What I found utterly astonishing in that these guys apparently do not “get it.” They do not recognize the signals they are sending, asking for a hand-out while living a lavish lifestyle.
David
Surely part of the problem is that the US/UK model of being the CEO of a large corporation includes a lot of ego boosting and conspicuous consumption. How difficult is it for these Detroit characters to let go of what they clearly value more than the being willing to be part of the cost cutting that their business are surely having to go through.
The exercise of power in this male style of domination is just not going to cut it any more. Leadership in the 21st century requires a completely different approach.
Time for a change? Why should your government support these dinosaurs?
@Barney,
I have a quote in my new book, The Media Savvy Leader, from the head of a giant association who expresses amazement that corporate boards continue to hire such people who are so out of step with business today.
The big 3 trio were not impressive when they came to DC, and it was as if they had been coached by attorneys than communications professionals. Fatal error.
David
David,
Thank you for your eloquent and searing commentary on what has long plagued American business culture: me-ism. I too remember the early 1970’s when Detroit ignored quality, ignored their faithful consumers, and created products that had a deliberate planned obsolesence.
The absolute arrogance and snobbery that led these men to simply believe all they had to do was show up for the money is similar to an aging beauty queen who just doesn’t understand she no longer is the “Bell of the Ball.”
As for Detroit? Turn out the lights the party’s over. . .
@dean guadagni,
It would be one things if the CEOs had a specific plan, were willing to take pay cuts themselves and eliminate the excesses, like private jets. But they are not willing. Either they are replaced or let Detroit go into bankruptcy which will permit smarter people to step in and clean it up.
There are no words that can adequately describe the arrogance, greed, corruption and self-centeredness that these three men represent. From corporate management and stock holders, to union leaders and their rank and file. We have lost our way
David,
Is it possible to pick up the pieces of a long failing brand after a disaster of bankruptcy? Could a savvy team come in and rebuild these automakers into competitive and ultimately thriving businesses despite the massive breach of trust these organizations have created with their once mighty consumer base?
More pointedly, is it possible to rebuild a brand that was created with a generation in mind, baby boomers and later, that is on it’s way out as mainstream demographically desirable consumers?
Even if a new team could restructure these monoliths. . . who is their consumer base?