http://www.freep.com/article/2011090...ime-consultant

Pretty sure I said he never left months and months ago but folks here didn't want to believe me.

The truth is, Bob back at GM goes much deeper than just a "part-time consultant."

 

Guess he was "shelved"?

 

I think that's good news. At least you know there's one person there who has common sense and an idea of what makes a car something that people want to buy.

Who didn't believe that people at GM still had contact with Lutz? I think it had been reported as an informal relationship for a while now, at least since the time when Susan Docherty (sp) had been promoted and it was reported that Lutz was helping her...

 

yep. I don't believe there's anyone here that actually believed Bob Lutz actually "left" GM. He's been something of an informal "consultant" since he "retired".

 

What is GM going to do when Luts is no longer available to come back for the 50th time?

 

Lutz has been with just about every car maker from BMW to Chrysler while most every GM executive has either spent their whole life at GM or only worked at one other car company.

With that type of experience and insight available to GM (of all places), you can bet if there's a way GM can keep him around for advice, observations, and input, they're most certainly going to.

 

IMO if GM doesn't, someone else will (or already has) try to place a price tag on his advise as well.

 

Problem is.........how does GM keep him alive? Because quite frankly.....they're screwed without him.

Count on it unless they put FULL FAITH in Reuss, which I don't see happening.

 

This is exactly what I was getting at...

 

Reuss and Lutz fill 2 entirely different roles.

Bob Lutz's role is in creating systems where cars get developed faster and better. Lutz is no car or chassis engineer. He's a system's guy who has a solid pedigree in the car business. He knows how to get the best out of the people who are in the business of creating cars, and has the guts to clear a path for them to operate.

Reuss is a top drawer engineer whose emphasis is on chassis and performance. He can get people to create some phenominal vehicles. If GM ever had an issue with engineering vehicles to compete with the best on the planet, Reuss is the guy.

But while Lutz has had to learn and chop through the systems of BMW, Ford, Chrysler, and GM (twice), Reuss is a GM lifer as far as I know. He doesn't bring the best of other car makers as well as lessons learned.

Lutz being essentially an upper executive version of a "job hopper", is pretty unique in what he brings to any car company. I can't name another car executive that has been so many places and therefore has as much knowledge (yet, for an executive is shockingly down to earth and accessible).

When Lutz finally does go for good (most likely in a box) there isn't going to be another person.... at any car company... that's going to be able to replece him.

 

Lutz is good but Chrysler and Ford seem to be doing okay without him. I would normally say GM needs to cut the cord and is set for the future...except I have seen Akerson say to many face palm, WTH is he thinking things. IE..cars are soda cans.

 

Lutz's influence at Ford was nowhere near what he had at Chrysler, and Chrysler hasn't exactly done well since he left back in the late 90s.

The issue is (and he mentions it in his book) is making changes stick.

What happened Chrysler was that after takeover, Daimler came in and was determined to do things a certain way and it basically ripped up Chrysler's product development systems and just about every product in the pipeline that wasn't "vital" (ie Ram, minivans, Jeep) or wasn't too far along to cancel. BL decided it was time to jump ship.

GM has a lot of career people who have done things a certain way for a long time. Whitacre was the perfect person to destroy the status quo, but the only area he left alone was product development because there was nothing wrong with it. Just the roadblocks that were thrown up in getting things done right and done quickly.

You're absolutely right in saying that GM needs to get on without BL, but as long as they are intrested in having him around (cause you know the guy simply doesn't believe in retiring), no harm in him advising and sharing his experience.

I know we all hope to be that relevent at 79!

 

The car business still relies on product the buying public is inspired to be passionate about.

Repeat this as many times as it takes to sink in.

Even the most plain jane econobox cries out for the best plain jane econobox customer be made aware and become inspired.

The whole of the car business is emotionally centered. Even a buyer who couldn't care less about amenities can be emotionally moved by VALUE. It's a settled mind that gladly signs a note.

The car business doesn't live and die by painting a pig to pass as a gazelle. It's meeting a customer with more than they expect through a purchase they will pay off for a number of years. The "shine" has to outlive the payments.

A great deal is not price defined, it's expectations exceeded for the price asked.

I understand the notion that the so called "old guard" needs to go. Fair enough. Nice slogan and a bit of truth on a case by case basis. However, some axes can cut the most brilliant of heads.

I think there's always a bit more involved in truly wise judgement.

Who among us wants to see the folks that mustered the glory days at GM run out? The sort that came up with inspirational or clever innovative cars? Most of the cats I know who came up with the 5th gen Corvette are gone.... not all, but many. Were they guilty of bad thinking? If you think yes, you are wrongo to a major level.

It's nice that Lutz is having a say. He's a sharp fellow. It was not so long ago that the powers that be ran his *** out.

I watched a good number of brilliant folks get run out of GM in the midst of "economic realities". If they are bringing Bob back? It's because some of the wrong folks were gunned down by those that wouldn't know the car business if it bit them in the ***. If some have realized it's a different business than they presumed... welcome to reality.

 

Good points all around......Actually...... one of the best posts I've read here in a while.

There is no doubt there was a lot of good that went out with the changes. But short of having a single person go through and handpick who'd stay, was there any effort or guidelines followed?

 

I think all intents were good in theory. There's no shortage of great folks working at GM. That I can guarantee you.