When the Bucks Stops Here!

As leaders, managers, or in today’s world, even those who work someplace where we have influence over decisions that are made that could affect others, we need to be careful and constructive in those decisions.  We seldom see examples of leaders who step up when things go wrong.  Some will do it and admit that the buck stops with them, but they won’t accept the full responsibility, which many times would lead to a resignation or some other type of repercussion.  Last week we saw a leader do so though when South Korean Prime Minister, Chung Hong-won, resigned after the failed rescue of the ferry that capsized. I found this interestingly juxtaposed with the firing of a number of the GM senior execs, but not the CEO.  I know, she is new, but remember, she was on the senior team and has been with the company for 34 years. I’m not saying that she should have been fired, but when the buck stops, it must stop somewhere and the best of the best leaders know it stops with them. 

Anything short of that, can feel like lip service to leadership.

Bottom and Top

It was on the front page and first story of every business paper, show, blog and news site.  General Motors promoted Mary Barra, to their CEO role.  The press wanted to make a big deal of Ms. Barra being the first woman to helm a car company, and that is right and fine of them to do this, but for me, the bigger story is that Ms. Barra is a 33-year employee of General Motors who began her career there as an intern and now is leading the company.

For those who are missing the amazing feat this is, consider that I believe it is harder to rise up from within a company to become CEO than it is for a Board to go to the outside and bring in someone new.  Why, you may ask?  Let's think about, "The grass is always greener on the other side".  It's human nature to think that the new and shiny object is better.  But even more so why it is hard to rise from within and go from the bottom to the top, is that people have history to deal with. 

In her 33-year career, Ms. Barra must certainly have crossed paths a few times with people who wouldn't today endorse her for the job.  She surely has made mistakes.  It would be naive to think that she hasn't had a few choice words with people along the years, who might still hold a grudge.  But, even so, she rose above the rest and made it through the gauntlet of time and experience to get to the top. 

My hat is off to her today!  Three cheers for the long-tenured and loyal who stay, believe, succeed and rise to the top!

Oh, Those Names and Acronyms We Choose

Those who know me know that I love nothing more than a joke or a one-liner that turns a word or a sentence into something else funny. My college friend Todd got so accustomed to it, that he could see them coming a mile away. As such, I am a cynic and many times a critic of naming conventions and acronyms. I go back to the days when Chevy released the Nova into Latin America. It was heard as "no go" (Should we have not seen GM’s problems even then?)I also cringed when I heard a United Airlines flight attendant say that their low-cost airline “Ted” was just “United without the U and I”. It also seems everything has to have an acronym or somebody doesn’t feel like they have done their job. American politics and programs are littered with acronyms and made up names, Fannies, Freddies, PACs, ACORNs, etc, etc. The most recent example that makes me giggle is T.A.R.P. Did the Treasury Department really need to come up with this and do they think that it makes me as a consumer feel any better about the program? I could argue that once again, someone wasn’t thinking. What does a tarp represent to most people? Yes, it is a temporary cover or shelter, which I can see where they were going with this, but for me a tarp is vulnerable and susceptible to strong winds and other flying foreign objects. It is only as effective as the stakes or lines that secure it in place and more often than not when we have to use a tarp we are worried about it blowing away and it does nothing but cause us more problems because we can't, or choose not to, fix the root problem. Maybe that is what TARP is supposed to do, but I know that its connotation has held up already that when the winds starting blowing differently about how to use the bailout monies, that Secretary Paulson was quick to change directions and stop buying loans and debt and instead focus on purchasing bank equities. Personally, I would have preferred not a TARP but rather a ROOF (Restructuring Of Opportunistic Financials) or a FLOOR (Federal Legislation Offering Opportunity & Restructuring) or maybe even some OOMPHS (Organization Offering Orderly Permanent Housing Solutions), and even better than a TARP would be the HAIL MARY! (Housing And Ill-Fated Loan Management And Restructuring, Yes-sir!). For the time being though, we have a TARP and as the USS TODAY said in last week's editorial, “Give TARP a Chance”. Sagging and blowing, hopefully not leaking, yes give TARP a chance.

Did Mitt Romney just apply for the “Car Czar” job?

I read with interest this morning’s NY Times editorial from Mitt Romney regarding the auto industry bailout. I must admit that I share many of his sentiments and concerns. The most foundational is the fear that putting more money into the same old system would only result in the same old output. GM’s open letter advertisement, saying, “People don’t think GM has done enough” (which they go on to try and refute) is absolutely true. GM, Chrysler and Ford have not done enough. The people are correct. Romney’s cry that there needs to be more innovation in R&D, Marketing and Labor Relations is dead on. I have always been fascinated with the Labor Relations approach and attitude of Detroit on both the company and union sides. Growing up professionally and learning labor relations strategies and tactics and having negotiated a Teamster’s contract, I can tell you that if Labor and Capital see themselves, as Detroit has for too many years, as adversaries or at the least, mistrusting co-workers, then there will be no innovation or progress to be made. The trigger word “concessions” is what we continue to hear that workers must make. What is lost is where are the “concessions” that the automakers are making on the other side of the equation? It appears that the years of lack of concessions from the automakers to change their ways and thinking, has finally caught up with them. And now they want to be “bailed out”. I like what Mitt had to say. His open professed love of cars, being from Detroit, his history with his father as the CEO of American Motors, and his broad view of corporate structuring and restructuring, makes him the ideal candidate to shake things up. I somehow think that Chrysler might have been in a better place had they hired Mitt away from the campaign trail vs. Bob Nardelli from his unsuccessful run at Home Depot. So, if we put government money into Detroit, which I believe we will end up doing, then let’s be sure and have a caretaker over that money and let’s put Mitt’s hat in the ring to be that person. How about it Mitt? Could you take $25B and turn it into $250B and set the course for an American car industry resurgence that returns to be an international powerhouse? You’d get my, if we could choose, vote.