Skip to content

Archive for December, 2009

GM, Customer Service & Reputation

Friday, December 4th, 2009

If you challenge an individuals reputation, you’d better be ready to get in a fight. For instance, I was recently shown a letter from GM dealer, Tom Sparks Automotive, of DeKalb, IL that was sent out to their customers. Here is what it said:

In keeping with our commitment to inform our customers, we are writing this letter to let you know about some changes taking place, as well as inform some of the misinformation that you might be receiving through the mail from the new General Motors.

After a thorough review of our relationship with GM, we have decided to completely break ties with them, causing us to consolidate operations… We want you to know that contrary to the letters you have received from GM in regard to our service, our trained technicians who have serviced your car in the past can still service your car, with only one exception: manufacturer warranty work…One of the things that we have never compromised on is the service you receive in our repair facility. According to GM’s policies and procedures book, a dealer is not supposed to let the customer know of any problems that your car might be experiencing if the customer is not aware of the problem. Not adhering to this policy the dealer risks the possibility of not being paid for the service by GM…

We strongly believe that GM, through its reinvention process, has forgotten the needs of the customer and that is something we at Tom Sparks are not willing to do… Thank you for your business, and we look forward to seeing you soon. (letter from Tom Sparks Automotive)

Survival is a challenging problem in today’s economy, especially in the automotive marketplace. As GM and Chrysler attempt to reinvent themselves, it’s a place where emotions speak loudly, as this letter demonstrates. But more importantly, everything is escalated when reputation is put on the line. And in the automotive industry, reputation plays an integral role in everything; from sales, to service, to customer satisfaction. It’s what made GM great, and what helped destroy it. However as this letter illustrates, GMs move to expel certain dealers through bankruptcy (although they’re now reconsidering this) has many unintended consequences, especially when a dealer’s reputation has been put on the line.

Bottom Line: Reputation is a critical attribute for every organization. This letter illustrates just a few of the many challenges GM is and will encounter as they attempt to rebuild their automotive customer base. Good luck, you’ll need it.

Too Big To Succeed?

Wednesday, December 2nd, 2009

The “Too Big To Fail” debate has been rampant for well over a year now as institutions like GM, CitiGroup, AIG,Chrysler and numerous others have essentially failed, only to be rescued by the US Government. Lack of leadership. Ineffective risk management. Rogue teams with few controls. Bloated cost structures. These are a few of the reasons why they failed. But what isn’t being offered up as a reason is this:

Were These Companies Were Too Big To Succeed?

Earlier this year The Hacket Group reported:

Most Companies Have Failed Agility Test; Three out of Four Global 1000 Companies Cannot Drive Cost Reductions That Match Declines in Revenue, Profits.

The world’s largest companies have for the most part failed in their efforts to reduce the cost of functions such as Finance, IT, HR, and Procurement over the past year, exacerbating the impact of dramatic declines in revenue, profits, and earnings, according to new research from The Hackett Group, Inc.

Hackett’s analysis of the latest financial results of nearly 200 of the 1,000 largest public companies in the world that have reported Q2 2009 financial information showed that only one company in four was able to manage their Selling, General, & Administrative (SG&A) costs in line with revenue reductions over the past 12 months.

While these companies saw average revenue reductions of 23.7 percent, they were only able to cut SG&A costs by 6.7 percent. As a result, SG&A costs as a percentage of revenue for Global 1000 companies have risen significantly over the same period, going from 12.6 percent of revenue to 15.5 percent of revenue. Hackett’s research found that typical Global 1000 companies (with $26 billion in annual revenue) are losing out on up to $1 billion in annual cost savings as a result of this lack of agility.

Yes, agility is an important component fo every company, especially during an economic upheaval. However, as you look at companies like CitiGroup, GM and others that have become exposed in this economic downturn, what words come to mind? Personally, words like inept, clumsy and bloated come to mind. And as I’ve written many times before, large companies are ripe for “silent problems” (problems that are avoided, neglected or go about unnoticed) to germinate, grow and potentially explode into a Without Warning event. The only way for large organizations to remain healthy is for them to be vigilent in the prevention of silent problems in the first place and the discovery/solving of them if they’ve already occurred.

Bottom Line: The Too Big To Fail debate should also include a debate about Too Big To Succeed. Only when the counter weight in this debate occurs can wise decisions be made before they become Without Warning Events.

Be the one to see it coming!

The first leadership book to point out the problem, then hand-deliver the solution.

Without Warning - Rondey Johnson

Learn More

Order Info