Bloomberg's Doron Levin on Mulally Hire

[RichardJensen]

The implication is Mulally, in Jensen's world, will wedge in a few pre-aranged "focus groups" (e.g. orchestrated dog-n-pony shows often calculated to CY someone's A, in my experience) or high-level executive pow-wows with the "right" customers (often involving drinks and golf trips, and leading to plenty of sucking-up behaviors) or perhaps a carefully choreographed "road show" of "state visits" (to borrow Tom Peters's sarcastic phrase for these overly-structured executive field trips which are nothing more than "showing the flag" to the troops and insulating the boss from harsh or unpleasant realities).

Yes. That's what I meant.

 

I couldn't have possibly meant that Mulally would supervise implementation of decent customer data gathering methods. I meant that as CEO, he'd do all the work of all his subordinates, and they would simply be an audience applauding him as he did all the tasks from hiring VPs down to scrubbing floor drains in the basement restrooms.

[dr511scj]

"the statement you object to as "vague" was obviously a conclusion based on opinion and a concrete "fact."

 

Squeal all you want to the contrary, it's vague and opinionated — and ignorant to "most knowledgeable followers" of this site.

 

I edited it to clarify that it was NOT a concrete "fact"

 

BTW, an opinion is, by nature "opinionated."

 

And you're certainly entitled to your opinion.

 

But the statement "Doron Levin writes what most knowledgable followers of Ford are thinking about the CEO hire" reflects a broad cross-section of what people who know about this industry ARE saying in various venues, other than perhaps the little Bill Ford "Amen" corner that is this site.

Edited September 7, 2006 by dr511scj

[g48150]

DUH.

 

You didn't read my blog that well did you?

Point is, he's already been a customer. Which as has been mentioned before, makes him a unique person in this business.

 

 

So, that alone qualifies, YOU, Rich, as CEO? Puff, puff, give man! I want some!

[dr511scj]

Yes. That's what I meant.

 

I couldn't have possibly meant that Mulally would supervise implementation of decent customer data gathering methods.

 

You mean "data gathering" methods such as the ones which led to the 1958 Edsel?

 

Ford already has a "data gathering" system. One which apparently misled Bill Ford throughout his five years of flip-flops, near misses and failure. And Bill had a whole career in the industry (not to mention all the first-hand anecdotes shared at Ford family affairs) to get ready for it. So he should have been able to anticipate the flaws and conceive of a plan to minimize them.

 

Of course, you believe Detroit's messiahs will come from non-automotive sources (a conclusion, btw, not completely shared by Peter Brown of the Automotive News:

 

"But you have to worry.

 

Consider the history of outsiders coming into major positions at automakers. Think Ron Zarrella at General Motors. Consider the fate of most outside executives, even those with automotive experience, who have joined Ford Motor Co. Think Bunkie Knudsen. Think a slew of executives hired from outside by Jacques Nasser. . . .

 

Ford is a notoriously nasty place for outsiders. High-level outsiders are seen to have stolen a job that rightfully belongs to a Ford lifer. The knives will be out. . . .

 

Nobody from outside the auto industry has successfully taken over an [u.S.] automaker since the early days of the U.S. auto industry." )

 

So it would be incumbent upon and prudent for Mulally to "educate himself" first-hand, so that he's got some basis to accept or to question the "data" generated by the Ford bureaucracy.

 

Getting out in the field without too many "handlers" is merely a reasonable strategy toward that objective.

[Guest Sixcav]

So, that alone qualifies, YOU, Rich, as CEO?

 

LOL, Don't you guys get it yet? Richie has spent so much time on this website self inflating his own ego and trying to impress everyone with his great grammar that he has literally trapped himself in his own home. His ego is too big to get it out the door.

[DSenstad]

It seems to me after reading this thread that some people find it more sporting to try and trap Richard than to really deliberate as to what is/will happen within the company at this point.

 

 

 

I can't help but wonder if some of these "experts" are industry "anal"ists that go around promoting there image for the mere fact that the more of an expert they are perceived to be, the more their words are worth. I tend to believe their words are over valued. I also believe that Mulally's job has very little to do with product development. That job has belonged to Field's for a few years now and what is anyone basing the premise that it is now Mulally's area? Mulally is on board to implement the next step of the "way forward". It was stated that no stone will be unturned. The plants have and are being addressed. Dealerships are being closed so that aspect is at least being looked at although I'm not sure to what extent it will be addressed, Mulally is now addressing the Glass House, cuts will be made and Mulally will be the man making those decisions.

[Nels Nelson]

The Mighty Mouse, H. Ross Perot, while on the board of GM refused to accept a company car. Instead he would go out and buy a car as any customer would by walking into a GM store. He would then report back to the board on his experiences.

 

Apparently the board and Roger Smith didn't like what Ross was telling them. They found him irritating and bought him out to the tune of $700,000,000 in order to get rid of him.

[Roadrunner]

The Mighty Mouse, H. Ross Perot, while on the board of GM refused to accept a company car. Instead he would go out and buy a car as any customer would by walking into a GM store. He would then report back to the board on his experiences.

 

Apparently the board and Roger Smith didn't like what Ross was telling them. They found him irritating and bought him out to the tune of $700,000,000 in order to get rid of him.

 

Perot does it the right way if he's bringing firm reviews of the company back to the heads of the company.

[dr511scj]

I also believe that Mulally's job has very little to do with product development. That job has belonged to Field's for a few years now and what is anyone basing the premise that it is now Mulally's area? Mulally is on board to implement the next step of the "way forward". It was stated that no stone will be unturned. The plants have and are being addressed. Dealerships are being closed so that aspect is at least being looked at although I'm not sure to what extent it will be addressed, Mulally is now addressing the Glass House, cuts will be made and Mulally will be the man making those decisions.

 

 

That's one way of looking at it. But Ford, for the time being, is in the vehicle business, not the "Way Forward" cost-cutting business. If the man at the top lacks sufficient understanding and vision as to the very thing that generates substantially the bulk of Ford's revenue--manufacturing and selling new vehicles--how is he going to meaningfully contribute to the "decisions" as to what parts of Ford are fat for trimming . . . or which are muscle or bone?

 

Sure, he could just blindly rely on what the Glass House gang feeds him on "product" and hope for the best . . . but isn't that part of what got Bill Ford into trouble?

 

Fields may prove to be a brilliant product man and a cagey labor negotiator, but that doesn't absolve Mulally from the responsibility to understand for himself the essentials of Ford's business. And Ford's business is PRODUCT, PRODUCT, PRODUCT! (everything else are just instrumentalities feeding and sustaining the product machine)

[RichardJensen]

You mean "data gathering" methods such as the ones which led to the 1958 Edsel?

Yes. That's what I meant.

 

I certainly DIDN'T mean that Ford needs to revamp how it acquires customer data. I meant that Mulally should just listen to whatever his handlers tell him.

 

As to the Auto News guy, yeah, I've read similar stuff. None of it rings true. Sure, someone could take aim at Mulally and try to torpedo him, but I don't see how. The guy's the top dog. It's not like people can go over his head. He needs to sign off on their efforts to screw him, and I don't see how a guy that worked his way up to CEO of Boeing commercial is going to be easy to dupe.

 

As to his Lexus ownership. Don't knock it. Not many people on the 12th floor of the Glass House have driven a Lexus. They don't have a true customer's perspective on the auto business. If you think that's not a problem, well, I guess that's fine.

 

Of course, if the guy had a rodded out Mustang and was complaining about the lack of forged pistons in the Mod engines, you'd probably figure he hung the moon.

Edited September 8, 2006 by RichardJensen

[dr511scj]

As to his Lexus ownership. Don't knock it. Not many people on the 12th floor of the Glass House have driven a Lexus. They don't have a true customer's perspective on the auto business. If you think that's not a problem, well, I guess that's fine.

 

Of course, if the guy had a rodded out Mustang and was complaining about the lack of forged pistons in the Mod engines, you'd probably figure he hung the moon.

 

Why shouldn't they know about BOTH? I expect top executives to be intimately familar with all of the competition's products AND how customers actually use OUR products . . . .

 

Of course, does Ford really offer anything competitive with Mulally's Lexus? Not in any of its domestic brands . . . .

Edited September 8, 2006 by dr511scj

[goingincirclez]

Why shouldn't they know about BOTH? I expect top executives to be intimately familar with all of the competition's products AND how customers actually use OUR products . . . .

 

Of course, does Ford really offer anything competitive with Mulally's Lexus? Not in any of its domestic brands. . . .

 

Ding! You finally got it! Actually, you and Richard have both presented some very good point / counterpoints (your incessant blathering about hyperventilating pistons aside) on this topic. Very good reading.

 

But really what it comes down to, is: Mulally wasn't born yesterday and has a ton of relevant experience and a big stick of cred to wield - the very thing that many have claimed Bill Ford lacked. Yes, he needs to become morefamiliar with MANY aspects of Ford - so does any new employee, and Alan needs to learn even more; given his past, I think he's up to it. No, it wouldn't hurt for him to "go to the trenches" once in a while just to keep himself grounded, but let's be realistic: he's only one man, and there's a lot of freaggin' trenches out there. But, anyone who rises through the ranks of an industrial conglomerate over 30 years surely knows something about delegation and getting results from people.

 

Now he's not a car guy, and he may not have the "raw instinct" or even a developed one. This would be arguably paramount toward knowing which "results" are the ones to run with. It will take time to develop that "sixth sense".

 

But as someone who soley wore the hat of consumer for the past 30 years, he must know something about what he wants and needs. People want Lincoln to turn around? Well here's the straight dope, right from from the top, as to why Lincoln can't hunt. He probably bought many other cars in the past 30 years. He probably knew and discussed them with others from time to time.

 

He probably hasn't whipped a GT or Shelby around its paces yet, but give it time. Besides, Ford can't be profitable just by selling performance cars anyway. Luxury brings in the profits, so let the man opine.

 

In the near-term, hopefully he's wise enough to listen to the people who truly know their stuff (assuming he's wise enough to know who they are, we can;t do anything else but give him the benefit of the doubt on that for now). At the end of the day he's the boss. And when the Boss says your products suck, and puts his money where his mouth is, that means it's time to change.

Edited September 8, 2006 by goingincirclez

[Sizzler]

...

Of course, if the guy had a rodded out Mustang and was complaining about the lack of forged pistons in the Mod engines, you'd probably figure he hung the moon.

 

Mulally gained his reputation by backing a carbon-fiber airplane.

 

That carbon-fiber airplane has not been on the market all that long.

 

I, for one, want to know how you repair a section of carbon-fiber fuselage.

Currently, you can weld in a new section, or add bracing to older airframes that are suffering from age-related stress. I'm pretty sure you can't do that with carbon-fiber. Airliner-sized autoclaves for all airlines?

 

So, for now he's a product whiz-kid who's 'hung the moon', but 10 years from now?

[Edstock]

The fact that he owns a Lexus 430 sedan couldn't be better for Lincoln. I feel sorry for the PD chimps, 'cause now they'll really have to pull the finger out.

[ANTAUS]

Considering he has a Lexus, it just proves to me he really isn't much of a car guy...I'm sure there's many vehicles he would drive, and probably not know what to look for, so hopefully his experience might be better used to execute other situations, and leave Mark Fields and hopefully some others (whomever they might be) as the car guys.

 

But again, many people wanted Bill to step down, so here you have it...careful what you ask for...

[dr511scj]

counterpoints (your incessant blathering about hyperventilating pistons aside)

ROTFL

 

That's hypereutectic pistons . . . they're just cheap, old cast pistons with a higher silicon content in the aluminum alloy. The best things about them is that they're super-cheap to make and you can run'em with tight wall clearances because they don't expand as much as a proper forging.

 

But they have the lifespan of an ice-cube in Death Valley if overreved or subjected to anything other than perfect combustion conditions or even high cylinder pressures/heat from forced induction. Then they just become BLOCK VENTILATING PISTONS . . . .

 

While poor tuning can trash even the best pistion, hypereutectics allow no margin for error.

 

Just ask any 1996-2001 Cobra owner who became too greedy with the boost . . . .

[ZanatWork]

Let's review!

 

The Mustang GT gets to 60 in approximately 5 seconds. This feat is essentially unchallenged at the car's base price. Hence, the car is selling very well.

 

But its engine is insufficient for short-cutting a high hp build. In other words, it won't reward a half-assed job. I've seen the engine build prices that have been posted here, and all I have to say is...these people are apparently the only ones on Earth that will pay list for parts.

 

Our "numbers above all else" type has posted that 25% of Mustang buyers modify them...while a signifigant percentage, still a minority.

 

To sum it up:

 

The person in question is obsessively angry (considering how often this topic has been brought forth) that Ford doesn't upgrade its fast-selling car's motor for a minority of buyers that want to do half an engine upgrade.

 

 

Heh. Good stuff.

Edited September 8, 2006 by ZanatWork

[goingincirclez]

ROTFL

 

That's hypereutectic pistons . . . they're just cheap, old cast pistons with a higher silicon content in the aluminum alloy...

 

LOL heh heh... Yes sorry, I knew what the word was and what you meant... it's just that I've seen you use that word so many times with seemingly every opportunity, I want to hyperventilate...

 

But I do appreciate the succinct summary of what they are; I'm by no means a 'rodder but I can find my way around an engine well enough most of the time. Thank you.

 

As for incessant blathing... yeah it's obviously important to you, as are Tbirds to me... but for crying out loud man, Ford has many many other things in its cafeteria to worry about before a set of ventilators that the vast majority of its customers don't care about. Is the preformance crowd important? You betcha, and you raise some good points about Ford's shortcomings. I won't disagree. I think it would be great if Ford used some of that vast, industry-leading R&D budget that Richard mentions and tweaked some things here and there, "throw a few bones" so to speak.

 

But personally, this late in the Mod game, I think Ford should skip reworking the pistons or anything else and just get a new V8 developed. The mod has never lived up to high potential vs. the competition. Reliable as heck, nice broad torque curve, but nothing to write home about. So keep it around for cruisers and gofers but get something else for excitement! Ford hasn't done much to the mod vis-a-vis the competition. The mod is what it is, occasionally gets a boost to remain on the low side of competitive, and that's it. It's almost like damaged goods.

 

No for the record I'm not totally down on the mod. I have two of them right now. Damn well near bulletproof, smooth, reliable, torquey. But nothing to crow about, ever, and Ford needs a few feathers.

[ZanatWork]

The mod plays to the majority of the market, but no performance hound likes to be reminded that they're in the minority.

 

The mod V8 will go longer, smoother, and easier with basic maintenance than any V8 I can name. I have customers that swear by the things for their vehicle fleets because they make adequate power, get decent economy, and ask for little beyond fluids and filters.

 

I know the GM 5.7 made more power, but what did that get the F-cars? Slower slaes and eventual death. Ford didn't have to react to a dying threat. The truck side only favors GM when the displacements get silly, and in that case people should look at the 6.8 V10 instead of complaining usulessly about the 5.4's bore limits.

 

For most people, that's a helluva great motor. My family has a few of 'em, and the compression they keep well into 6-digit mileage is fantastic.

 

I agree with what I believe was inferred above-the hell with hot mod bits, spend the development money to make the upcoming V8 family killer out of the gate. If Ford makes a V8 family that's impressive from the get-go, performance parts and applications would logically follow.

Edited September 8, 2006 by ZanatWork

[dr511scj]

The mod plays to the majority of the market, but no performance hound likes to be reminded that they're in the minority.

 

What does that mean?

 

I suspect a number of Ford rodders actually build Fords because it IS different from the Chevrolet majority.

 

But that doesn't mean that Ford, in the face of getting absolutely kicked in crate engines, embarrassed by 100,000 or more Chevrolet-powered "Ford" street rods and at least 20,000 Chevy-powered F-100s, being blown away on probably a thousand oval tracks across America by about a 98:1 ratio of Chevrolets to Fords, having no competitive Ford products in the upper echelons of multi-make professional drag racing (excluding John Force's funny cars--powered by aftermarket Chrysler-style Hemis--and a handful of IHRA Pro Stock racers almost nobody's ever heard of running $100,000 Ford Boss "hemi" mountain motors that no ordinary Mustanger will ever be able to buy) ought to ALSO just lay down as the GM LSx and Chrysler's new Hemi become the dominant hot rod V8s of the future.

 

Given the hundreds of thousands of Modular-powered performance vehicles Ford has built over the past decade, the numbers suggest that if Ford would encourage Modular development in the way Zora Arkus-Duntov suggested for the then new SBC, that it would yield dividends in the aftermarket popularity of these engines . . . and correspondingly of Ford products powered by them.

 

The mod V8 will go longer, smoother, and easier with basic maintenance than any V8 I can name. I have customers that swear by the things for their vehicle fleets because they make adequate power, get decent economy, and ask for little beyond fluids and filters.

No doubt the engine is highly reliable in stock applications. And when properly built, they will withstand significantly more abuse than any stock-block 5.0. And the basic strength of the block is one reason why it ought to be a more popular engine, but for Ford's inadequate strategy toward the performance market.

 

 

 

I know the GM 5.7 made more power, but what did that get the F-cars? Slower slaes and eventual death. Ford didn't have to react to a dying threat. The truck side only favors GM when the displacements get silly, and in that case people should look at the 6.8 V10 instead of complaining usulessly about the 5.4's bore limits.

 

The 5.7 killed the Camaro? Both the 1993-97 LT1 and newer 1998-up LS1 had superior torque and power to Ford v8s at the similar price point. However, they were installed in poorly-built, impractical, expensive to repair, poorly-designed cars. The lesson there is that even the greatest engine cannot redeem a poorly-executed pile of crap.

 

The 6.8 has never been offered in DOHC or other high-performance form (unlike the Viper V10 or the BBC, for example) and FRPP basically has stopped development of the 385-series 460 (although there are a number of them, based on remanufactured 2-bolt cores, still in the FRPP catalog). But GM and DCX have both continued development of engines larger than 331 cubic inches for street applications. While Ford's multivalve OHC/DOHC technology ought to give them an advantage, Ford has failed to develop the cylinder heads and blocks necessary to take advantage of the competition's reliance on 2V pushrod engines.

 

And while the modular's bore centers are compromised to fit in FWDs that will apparently never be built, if the engines were developed, they would be more than a match for DCX and GM.

 

BTW, I just recently tested a Chrysler 300C SRT-8. The 6.1 Hemi is an awesome engine for a 2V pushrod design and the Chrysler easily pulled harder than a stock Mustang GT or any naturally-aspirated Cobra--despite that it's in a huge luxury sedan (which, incidentally was much nicer than the last Lincoln I tested).

 

When this 6.1 Hemi is installed in the 2008 or 2009 Challenger, no Modular without a significant power adder will be able to keep up (assuming DCX brings in the weight at a reasonable level). Given that Ford sees fit only to permit a few well-heeled customers buy V8s over 300 h.p., it's likely that Dodge owners will be whipping their fair share of Mustangs on a regular basis. Even the upcoming Caliber SRT-4 is likely to slay quite a few unsuspecting Mustangs.

 

I don't even want to think about a new Camaro with an LS7 . . . .

 

Developing the necessary FRPP parts and H.D. RPOs on the Modular is a lot cheaper than starting over from a clean sheet.

 

I agree with what I believe was inferred above-the hell with hot mod bits, spend the development money to make the upcoming V8 family killer out of the gate. If Ford makes a V8 family that's impressive from the get-go, performance parts and applications would logically follow.

 

I'm not really excited about starting all over again. How many incompatible V8s has Ford cooked up over the years.

 

Flathead

Y-block

MEL

FE/FT

289/302/351 Windsor/Boss 302

385-series (including the orphaned Boss 429)

335-series (351 Cleveland, 351M, 400M)

Modular

Yamaha

Lincoln/Jaguar/Thunderbird

 

Constant improvement doesn't mean reinventing the wheel every ten years or less.

 

History suggests that "performance parts and applications would logically follow" impressive V8s is not true unless the right confluence of factors occurs. For example, Chrysler's first hemi ought to have dominated the streets by virtue of its design (albeit a bit heavy and hard to swap into pre-1948 model cars) but it only caught on in professional racing. Why? Because it wasn't cheap and easy to build, in part, because Chrysler didn't follow Zora's advice. Similarly, Studebaker and AMC's early OHC V8s were almost bulletproof, but failed in market appeal because of a lack of performance parts. Cadillac/Oldsmobile's impressive Northstar has lagged in aftermarket development because, until recently, it was never installed in a performance car and it was not developed and marketed as a performance aftermarket V8. And 3/4s of the Ford V8 families I cited above never amounted to squat for high performance because Ford didn't develop parts for them.

 

But even if Ford goes with a new "family V8," it must make certain that it is retrofitable into older Fords and that they follow Zora's advice to develop H.D. and special service (racing) parts for it from the get-go. (and decent crate engines, following the GMPP model). Otherwise, Ford will endure another wasted decade waiting for it to catch on.

 

The simple fact is that there are millions of Modulars out there and unless Ford and FRPP does more to spur interest in them, Chrysler, Chevrolet and maybe even Toyota (depending on what TRD does with the Tundra V8) stand to gain.

[Guest Sixcav]

I can't speak for the rest of the hot rod set out there of course, only for myself. I like the 4.6 3V in my Mustang. To my way of thinking 300 hp is plenty enough for a street car. I know there's always those guys that think faster is never fast enough. If that's their bag so be it. Personally I plan on keeping my Mustang pretty much stock. I don't intend on major engine modifications. I've seen guys dump tens of thousands of dollars off in a car to make it go 2 seconds faster than it did stock. Big whoop. About the only problem I have with my Mustang is the endless parade of little rod heads out on the street that constantly try and gode me into a street race. Just the other night I had some idiot in about a 98 Firebird pull along next to me and start dumping his clutch and goosing his car in an effort to get me to race. I'm just out there going to get myself a drink at the gas station for Christ sake!! On top of that we are about 5 seconds up the road (literally) from the south end police precinct where there is always at least a couple officers in the parking lot. It's dark so you can't see as well. And street racing is just dangerous and stupid anyway. It's a constant thing for me. Four out of 5 times I drive somewhere in my car it seems there will be at least one little tuner boy or rod head who will try and get me to race his silly ass. It gets really old after awhile. It's gotten to the point that I'm tempted to buy a couple year old Corvette. It seems you never see the Vette guys speeding around town. Or at least very rarely. Additionally you don't see people trying to provoke them everywhere they go. Maybe a Vette is the better way to go to avoid the sillyness. But, anyway, getting back on issue, I don't have any issues with the 4.6 motor. I think it's a good solid engine, reliable, performs well for my tastes. No worries.

[dr511scj]

It gets really old after awhile. It's gotten to the point that I'm tempted to buy a couple year old Corvette. It seems you never see the Vette guys speeding around town. Or at least very rarely. Additionally you don't see people trying to provoke them everywhere they go. Maybe a Vette is the better way to go to avoid the sillyness. But, anyway, getting back on issue, I don't have any issues with the 4.6 motor. I think it's a good solid engine, reliable, performs well for my tastes. No worries.

 

It's called "deterrence." It your car is sporty, but easy pickin's on the street, you'll get a lot of challenges. But if your ride brings overwhelming fire power, surprisingly, you're challenged much less often.

 

Nobody's saying you can't have a lo-po 300 h.p. V8 in a Mustang if you want one.

 

All we are saying is that Ford shouldn't ignore and neglect its customers who want to add a 100+ more and it shouldn't relegate real high performance to the realms of limited-production $60,000-$200,000 supercars that encourage rampant dealer gouging and deprive the vast majority of Ford customers any opportunity to purchase.

 

I don't see how Ford providing better service to its high performance customers adversely affects you.

 

BTW, you'd better not sample a Z06 Corvette or any DCX SRT model or even the upcoming Mazdaspeed3(which will have a better power-to-weight ratio than a Mustang GT, if reports are correct). If you do, 300 in your Mustang won't seem so satisfactory anymore.

 

If you want to feel good about lo-po, go to Bill Ford's new webpage on "American Innovation" (not much pesky high performance or racing stuff there).