by Peter M. DeLorenzo



GM faces The Ultimate Question.

Detroit. GM announced the formation of a global Automotive Product Board to go along with its existing Automotive Strategy Board last week. A committee by any other name, the critical need for the Automotive Product Board came to light when GM discovered that the new Pontiac G6 convertible, which is based on its "Epsilon" platform architecture (also shared by the Chevy Malibu and Saab 9-3), couldn't use the Saab 9-3 convertible as its foundation, because Saab engineers had changed too much of the basic assembly points. The G6 convertible is now severely delayed, and GM is on a mission to eliminate these kinds of dire inconsistencies in the future.

The immediate and obvious question is why has it taken so long for GM to address this fundamental issue, when other car companies around the world have been doing this for years? And once that question is asked, one begins to wonder just how far behind GM really is in its battle to right its listing ship.

For the record, the new Automotive Product Board has 14 executives on it, every one from Rick Wagoner, Bob Lutz and Gary Cowger, to eleven other key GM executives from around the world. It will focus on cutting costs and eliminating confounding inconsistencies (like the G6 issue), which prevent GM from competing effectively in markets all over the world. The Automotive Strategy Board, which has been in existence since 1998, focuses more on the business strategy side of GM's endeavors, and has 15 members.

The goals of the new Automotive Product Board are admirable. After all, if GM wants to compete with alacrity and effectiveness around the world, it must stop shooting itself in the foot at every turn. And if this new board is going to be effective, then the kind of nonsensical missteps encountered with the G6 convertible must be eliminated. But the sheer size of this board is ludicrous and unwieldy, and no matter how well-intentioned it may be, the odds are against this entity moving at the speed necessary to make a serious impact.

But I'd like to back up a minute and ask another question: Is a 14 member committee designed to eliminate global redundancy really going to be able to make an impact on GM's rapidly eroding market share in the U.S. market? And this begs another question: Why isn't Mark LaNeve, the new GM North America vice president of vehicle sales, service and marketing and their top marketing executive, not on either the Strategy or the Product Board?

Make no mistake about this, GM's most urgent critical need right now is its plummeting market share. And global Automotive Product Board or no, GM is losing the battle of the trenches in its most important market. Fabulous products are still absolutely essential for success in this, the most competitive market in automotive history, but without outstanding marketing to go along with those great products - they will get lost in the shuffle of a fragmented and wildly over crowded arena.

So while GM is wrestling with getting its "behind the curtain" house in order, its sliding market share has to be priority number one. And Mark LaNeve is the guy who will have to come up with the strategic plan that gets GM in gear again.

I know just the place where he and his troops need to start too. GM is slowly but surely selling its cars and trucks over and over again to the same set of buyers, with loyalty programs, incentives and every kind of retail come-on imaginable. The only problem is that this group of buyers is dwindling with each passing model year, and thus so is GM's market share. Until GM actually starts selling cars and trucks outside of its eroding core of loyal buyers, it will continue to watch its share of the U.S. market take a nosedive.

Getting its global product machine in order is something that's long overdue for GM, but in the process of doing so it gives us a revealing clue as to just how far the company has to go before it's competing like the automotive giant it once was.

But in the meantime, GM has to come up with a strategic marketing plan that will pull itself out of its sales death spiral.

How can GM convince consumers who don't already drive its products to even consider one of its cars or trucks, let alone buy one?

That's the Ultimate Question facing GM.