Henderson’s ouster at GM still doesn’t mean that fresh blood is better blood
Logic, of course, might dictate otherwise. After all, Rick Wagoner, the last GM chief, was a GM lifer, and couldn’t keep the company from going down the tubes. The Obama Adminsitration forced him out in March. It enticed Ed Whitacre, a retired AT&T chief (not exactly the company I’d cite for historically excellent management), to become chairman, but replaced Wagoner as chief with Fritz Henderson, another GM lifer. Apparently, Whitacre and the board — and probably the folks in Washington — are disappointed in Henderson, too. He got ousted Tuesday afternoon. Whitacre is acting CEO while they look for another new chief.
So clearly, insiders can’t save this company, right? Fresh blood is needed, right?
Not so fast. There’s an old saying — water and cyanide kills you, water and arsenic kills you, water and strychnine kills you — aha! Water kills.
The fact is, being an insider is no guarantee of competence — but it should not be viewed as a dealbreaker. Granted, Alan Mulally was an outsider, and has done wonders with Ford. But in contrast, look at Xerox. It brought Rick Thoman in from IBM, and he nearly destroyed that company. It took Anne Mulcahy, a veteran who knew the troops and were trusted by them, to get the company back on track. Or how about Corning? When it almost tanked after the telecom implosion of 2002, it brought Jamie Houghton back from retirement, and he brought the company back from the brink.
I’m not saying Henderson should not have been ousted. From what I hear, GM’s come up with a stellar product line and its ad and marketing campaign seems to be good. But I don’t know whether he blew the chances to profitably divest various GM product lines, or whether he was too wishywashy in his negotiations with the unions.
But chances are good that the board isn’t questioning what he has or has not done, but rather the apparent lack of aggressiveness with which he has made his moves. It may not want different action, it wants faster action.
And maybe it should. But that doesn’t necessarily mean it needs to bring in someone whose main claim to the job is outsider status. Look at Bob Nardelli — He was great at General Electric, an absolute disaster at Home Depot. How’s he doing at Chrysler? I don’t know — but whether he’s a stellar or dismal chief, I’ll bet it has more to do with his particular style and skills, not his knowledge of cars and Chrysler.

Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.












It would be nice to have a car guy in charge, someone who knows a good car when he sees one and knows how to build them. One of the big problems with GM is crappy factories built on the old model. A visit on the net reveals factories in Europe and Japan that are wonders and can make multiple versions and models on the same line.
Which, of course, mitigates in favor of promotion from within. I’d say that maybe they should hire someone from Toyota — but that company has finally had a bunch of its own problems this last year.