New GM Chairman Whitacre admits: "I don't know anything about cars."
Newly tapped General Motors Chairman Edward E. Whitacre, Jr. may have built AT&T into a telecommunications powerhouse, but it's fair to question whether he can help do the same for GM. You see, he isn't particularly savvy on the whole auto business thing. In his own words: "I don't know anything about cars." While he admits that cars are a new consideration for him, Whitacre doesn't see it as a much of a problem: "A business is a business, and I think I can learn about cars. I'm not that old, and I think the business principles are the same."The 67-year-old Whitacre has until Aug. 31 – the date GM is set to exit Chapter 11 – to bone up. Maybe we shouldn't be too critical. After all, former GM engineer and current 2953 Analytics principal, Jim Hall, thinks Whitacre is "a good choice" based on his experience and in the similarities he sees between AT&T and GM:
"He was one of the guys who helped create a new AT&T that wasn't so dependent on land-line phone service. There's a parallel with General Motors. GM is not now about just making cars. It's about re-creating itself as a 21st-century car company. They have to have somebody at the top that understands they have to make a new GM."Whitacre says he was enticed out of retirement by the Treasury Department and Steven Rattner, President Barack Obama's auto task force dealmaker. He added that the Treasury basically told him, "We need your help. It's a great company. You could be a lot of assistance to GM." Big Ed says that he is helping GM out of bankruptcy as "a public service." We hope he is a quick study.
[Source: Bloomberg | Image: Mark Wilson/Getty]
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
Beastage 1:00PM (6/10/2009)
Don't need to either, a chairman needs to know how to make smart business and that's all.
Reply
zamafir 1:33PM (6/10/2009)
correct, as ford proved. competent businessperson > nostalgic car nut.
jpm100 1:56PM (6/10/2009)
Mullaly knew something about the manufacture of very expensive durable goods with multiple regulatory and customer driven requirements.
Cell phones are a bit removed from that.
C.W. 2:58PM (6/10/2009)
jpm100 is right... phones/telecom is nothing like heavy industry. the supply chain is different, the engineering, design, testing, launch curves, etc... while you may not need to know anything about 'cars' per se, i would venture to say any good auto CEO MUST have some connection with large scale, complex assembly systems (planes, boats, trains, etc.)... not to mention Mulally was a sounding board for the development of the first generation Taurus. He was respected back in the 80's as an industrial genius.
SSS 3:10PM (6/10/2009)
Apparently no one at GM has known about cars for the past 20 or so years so it makes no difference. Furthermore, considering the taxpayers are funding GM operations via socialist obama there is even less reason to care...
It;s too bad the uaw has survived through this...
elprogramer 3:29PM (6/10/2009)
He's *not* a CEO, he's a Chairman of the Board. His job is to oversee what management is doing and make replacement of the company officers if they're under performing.
Sea Urchin 1:01PM (6/10/2009)
So? Neither did Wagoner or Obama or Fritz or Nardelli
Reply
Joe K. 1:12PM (6/10/2009)
Mulally was an airplane guy and he seems to make good decisions...
dukeisduke 1:23PM (6/10/2009)
Or John Smale, or Ron Zarrella (puke!).
Judy Zik 1:29PM (6/10/2009)
Mulally had atleast studied up on it a bit. He had used the development of the Taurus at Ford as a case study for how Boeing could do things.
I am hopeful about an outsider having a better handle on things. GM needs someone at the top with no connection to their disfunctional corporate culture. Time to stop putting spin on excuses and ask themselves why not. I worry this is a stretch though for a 67 year old with no car experience.
I guess with a retired old man at the top of GM Buick is safe.
BigWill 2:16PM (6/10/2009)
There is a big difference between running Boeing and AT&T. Boeing is very similar to a car company - transportation industry, *highly* customer driven, manufacturer. AT&T isn't any of those things. Ask any iPhone owner who'd kill to be on another network.
John Johnson 1:02PM (6/10/2009)
Maybe it's good to get an "outsider" to the industry to come in and handle business. He'll look at it as simply a business, and I'd bet the first thing he'll try to do is reduce costs. And one of the main costs is labor. I wish there were a way to get rid of the UAW.
Reply
JZeke 4:39PM (6/10/2009)
If he can't get past labor though, the ax falls on design and engineering... and we're back to the Cimmaron.
Smegley 1:02PM (6/10/2009)
Guess he was on the correct political donors list.
Reply
David 1:12PM (6/10/2009)
Worth checking into!
alex 2:17PM (6/10/2009)
The guy is a very successful businessman... what makes you assume foul play?
Protzenegger 6:15PM (6/10/2009)
Actually, he endorsed McCain. What's your story now?
Saxxon 7:51PM (6/10/2009)
"The guy is a very successful businessman... what makes you assume foul play?"
Have you been paying attention to the current administration at all lately?
Ed 1:05PM (6/10/2009)
A statement like that actually reassures me. Because for too long, the auto industry has insisted on promoting people who've worked in the industry since ground level. But while that guarantees knowledge of the product, it also guarantees that old ideas are going to keep lingering.
The American auto industry needs completely unbiased, fresh perspectives to thrive.
Reply
David 1:12PM (6/10/2009)
Actually... the US Auto industry needs Government to stand down and get out of it's way - that includes the Unions, as they are just an extension of the Government in my opinion. THAT would be a completely new, fresh and unbiased direction and one that would kick-start these companies into overdrive. Sadly, that is not to happen, so expect more failure and misery from the new Government Motors (Chrysler too).