Bill Ford is in the news these days, no doubt a PR blitz of the highest standard for the CEO of one of America's oldest companies, and an automotive institution that despite problems in recent years that included the Firestone tire debacle of the end of the century, has endured and innovated to some degree the concept of the modern automobile.
Ford is reminiscent of Lee Iacocca, the former Chrysler head who turned that brand around in the early eighties, by introducing the K car and minivan brands, as well as miraculously paying back a more than billion dollar debt to the American government. They share a bravado that encourages consumers to trust them based on their word and philosophy, and their mutual no nonsense yet innovatively insightful approach to business, and blue collar appeal establishes them both as corporate visionaries who hold and held genuine interest in the brands that they represent. This is refreshing in a corporate landscape that increasingly puts little emphasis on people, and robotically looks at quarterly profits. This is in the midst of one of the biggest layoffs in the history of the automotive industry, with announcements that almost 1/4 of Ford's workforce will be laid off this year, representing the layoff of 30,000 jobs. Bill Ford has used every opportunity to avoid blaming predeccesors, and veered away from talking about the high costs of steel and fuel. He has instead given a sobering admission that Ford simply hasn't paid attention to the consumer, hasn't had a grasp on how to effectively and profitably manage some of it's brands, and needs to re-assess and move forward as an organization in order to see through some of the much needed, risky, and unorthodox overhauls that the company requires. The Ford Motor Group, that includes brands like Land Rover, Volvo, Jaguar, and a 33.4% stake in Mazda, coupled with a very profitable credit network, is more than 275 billion dollars in debt. With a dwindling market share in the U.S., and a perceived inability to effectively win back market share with Asian rivals who seem to be listening to the consumer more, and producing winning vehicle designs, Ford has been the bane of financial analysts who anticiapte the losses to mount and proceed into crisis. American automotive companies are not winning the war, and have long been perceived as producing lemons in comparison to Japanese and South Korean companies who source labour cheaply, and have long been producing products that for the most part have reputations for superior quality and longevity. Even in domestically dominated markets like heavy trucks, where GMC and Ford have historically dominated, Honda and Toyota have not only been taking awards for innovation and functionality, they have been earning consumer trust and winning converts in a market landscape that sees gas efficiency and practicality, not to mention environmentally sound products as more important factors in decisions to buy. Toyota's Prius Hybrid, and Honda's Ridgeline are two prime examples of vehicles that redefined what the industry should be looking to, and the company culture that the Japanese have long been able to hold over American workers has served them well in ensuring that the cars that come off the lines not only meet quotas in terms of production, but embody a pride in workmanship that is unheralded.
Bill Ford's proposal for Ford to move forward into the future is an interesting one, and for a guy who only 10 years ago was privately deemed by the board to be too young and brash, regardless of his namesake, to even qualify as a serious player in the industry makes him even more interesting. The comparisons between him and Iacocca are deeper than one might think. It was Ford's grandfather, Henry Ford II, that publicly clashed with Iacocca after the Mustang success of the 60's (Iacoccoa is credited as the father of the everyman sports car), and both men have reputations as managerially against the grain. I'm curious to see what happens here.
No comments:
Post a Comment