Jump to content
  • Custom Search


Ovaltine

Autoextremist's DeLorenzo's assessment of Ford management....

Recommended Posts

Wow.....  this article covers A LOT of ground, but the section on future CEO Farley is alarming, if it's anywhere near being an accurate assessment of Farley's activities to-date.

 

FORD’S HIGHWAY TO HELL.

 

http://www.autoextremist.com/

 

Excerpt:

"...Am I picking on Farley? Hardly. I have only scratched the surface in describing this egomaniacal character and his blatant power grab, and now that he has been given the reins and deemed to be the heir apparent, he could wreak havoc on the company’s future for years. And this simply shouldn’t be, of course. One bad actor shouldn’t be causing this much consternation and hand-wringing throughout the enterprise, threatening to jeopardize everything the Ford Motor Company stands for. "

 

Hmmmm.... <gulp>

 

-Ovaltine

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a Ford loyalist it is painful to watch this play out and much of this blame should be directed at Bill Ford. You don't have to be a brain surgeon to see the similarities between Ford Motor Company and the Lions-both run by people that by all accounts are in over their head and going in the opposite direction of where they need to be. How the hell do the Lions go 9-7-fire their coach because it was not good enough and then two short years later win 3 games and the coach/GM keeps their jobs. Same story here with Hackett-and while I agree now might not be the time to make changes at the top, if this continues it needs to happen. And the sad part is, Ford's senior management team seems willfully un-prepared and over-matched.  I would feel differently if Mark Reuss was on the bench instead of Farley. Hate having the top 2 spots being run by sales/marketing guys instead of someone with a manufacturing/engineering background. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, kyle said:

As a Ford loyalist it is painful to watch this play out and much of this blame should be directed at Bill Ford. You don't have to be a brain surgeon to see the similarities between Ford Motor Company and the Lions-both run by people that by all accounts are in over their head and going in the opposite direction of where they need to be. How the hell do the Lions go 9-7-fire their coach because it was not good enough and then two short years later win 3 games and the coach/GM keeps their jobs. Same story here with Hackett-and while I agree now might not be the time to make changes at the top, if this continues it needs to happen. And the sad part is, Ford's senior management team seems willfully un-prepared and over-matched.  I would feel differently if Mark Reuss was on the bench instead of Farley. Hate having the top 2 spots being run by sales/marketing guys instead of someone with a manufacturing/engineering background. 

 

 


Hackett’s mandate is to build the best vehicle possible and win the segment.  That’s an engineer’s dream and it seems to be happening with Bronco and other new projects.  Mulally never supported that approach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simply put, DeLorenzo breadline got cut off by Ford and he's pissed at him. Guess who did it?

 

https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/ford/2019/06/19/ford-executive-jim-farley-toyota/1299871001/

 



After Farley was promoted in April to president of new business, technology and strategy, Peter DeLorenzo wrote on Autoextremist.com that “Ford’s chief bad actor and enfant terrible’ was “clearly being moved off to the side.”

The blogger, who consulted for Ford until Farley decided not to renew the contract, referred to Farley in October 2018 as “Jim ‘I’m a genius, just ask me’ Farley, Ford’s self-appointed all-knowing — and all-tedious — marketing guru."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ovaltine said:

Wow.....  this article covers A LOT of ground, but the section on future CEO Farley is alarming, if it's anywhere near being an accurate assessment of Farley's activities to-date.

 

You realize of course, Farley has a boss.  He goes through periodic performance reviews.  His work is being monitored, closely, by the Board of Directors.  He would have been fired years ago if he was as bad as DeLorenzo says.  

 

And as pointed out elsewhere, DeLorenzo had a consulting contract with Ford that Farley terminated.  Kind of explains things, doesn't it.

Edited by mackinaw
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mackinaw said:

 

You realize of course, Farley has a boss.  He goes through periodic performance reviews.  His work is being monitored, closely, by the Board of Directors.  He would have been fired years ago if he was as bad as DeLorenzo says.  

 

And as pointed out elsewhere, DeLorenzo had a consulting contract with Ford that Farley terminated.  Kind of explains things, doesn't it.

And never once in PDL's rants does he mention that it was his ad company that Jim Farley benched,

in a strange way, Peter's criticisms of Jim Farley also fit him to a tee.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

And never once in PDL's rants does he mention that it was his ad company that Jim Farley benched,

in a strange way, Peter's criticisms of Jim Farley also fit him to a tee.....

 

I actually met DeLorenzo once at the Henry Ford Museum. We were both at the car exhibit looking at the Mustang 1.  Nice guy in person, actually kind of quiet and mild-mannered.  Quite a contrast from his writer side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mackinaw said:

 

I actually met DeLorenzo once at the Henry Ford Museum. We were both at the car exhibit looking at the Mustang 1.  Nice guy in person, actually kind of quiet and mild-mannered.  Quite a contrast from his writer side.

I'm sure Jim Farley is too.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, akirby said:


Hackett’s mandate is to build the best vehicle possible and win the segment.  That’s an engineer’s dream and it seems to be happening with Bronco and other new projects.  Mulally never supported that approach.

No kidding? I can't remember if it was during Mulally's reign or someone else... but I SWEAR I remember there was a time when Fords #1 goal was to build the #1 vehicle in the segment.... Whether it be F150 or the Ford Fusion, the goal was "if you're going to build a vehicle, it better be the best"

I can't remember when and who said that, but I thought that used to be a thing... Can someone remind me what timeframe/CEO i'm thinking of?

Edited by probowler
Wording

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, mackinaw said:

 

I actually met DeLorenzo once at the Henry Ford Museum. We were both at the car exhibit looking at the Mustang 1.  Nice guy in person, actually kind of quiet and mild-mannered.  Quite a contrast from his writer side.

I mean, it's a lot easier to speak your mind unfiltered when behind a keyboard, versus saying it to someones face.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, probowler said:

No kidding? I can't remember if it was during Mulally's reign or someone else... but I SWEAR I remember there was a time when Fords #1 goal was to build the #1 vehicle in the segment.... Whether it be F150 or the Ford Fusion, the goal was "if you're going to build a vehicle, it better be the best"

I can't remember when and who said that, but I thought that used to be a thing... Can someone remind me what timeframe/CEO i'm thinking of?

Mulally's two best lines

Best in class fuel economy

Ford bringing technology to the  masses in affordable quality vehicles

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But is he wrong?

He was right about Sergio, Ghosn, Lutz, Piech, Schrempp, Ammann, et al.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2020's Farley is a FAR cry from 2010's Farley - who didn't make many friends with his abundant self confidence and oozing cockiness. 

 

He's said to have learned some very hard lessons - both privately and publicly - and has earned the full trust and confidence of Bill Ford to be the man who will execute the aggressive restructuring plan. 

 

From what I can tell, I don't have any worries about corporate leadership as long as Bill has his wits. He is fully and painfully aware that his family's legacy is being cast with each new model and every decision made... in a way that hasn't fully been appreciated since the first half of Henry II's reign. 

 

Mulally was the right guy for the time.

Fields was NOT the right guy , and Bill regrets giving his leash the length he did. 

Hackett is the right guy to clean up the mess. 

Farley, IMHO, is the right guy to push the directive forward. 

 

"Commit to and own the segment" is BIll's directive. It won't change. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, probowler said:

I mean, it's a lot easier to speak your mind unfiltered when behind a keyboard, versus saying it to someones face.

Did your fingers burst into flames after you typed that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PREMiERdrum said:

2020's Farley is a FAR cry from 2010's Farley - who didn't make many friends with his abundant self confidence and oozing cockiness. 

 

He's said to have learned some very hard lessons - both privately and publicly - and has earned the full trust and confidence of Bill Ford to be the man who will execute the aggressive restructuring plan. 

 

From what I can tell, I don't have any worries about corporate leadership as long as Bill has his wits. He is fully and painfully aware that his family's legacy is being cast with each new model and every decision made... in a way that hasn't fully been appreciated since the first half of Henry II's reign. 

 

Mulally was the right guy for the time.

Fields was NOT the right guy , and Bill regrets giving his leash the length he did. 

Hackett is the right guy to clean up the mess. 

Farley, IMHO, is the right guy to push the directive forward. 

 

"Commit to and own the segment" is BIll's directive. It won't change. 

In the past, the big concern with Farley was that he'd never run a P&L at Ford

but after his stint in Europe he's obviously pushing on to bigger, better things.

 

Farley is the heir apparent now and barring any huge setback will probably

inherit the best product line up Ford and Lincoln has ever had.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/8/2020 at 11:06 AM, akirby said:


Hackett’s mandate is to build the best vehicle possible and win the segment.  That’s an engineer’s dream and it seems to be happening with Bronco and other new projects.  Mulally never supported that approach.

 

Understood but the Company ran better overall under Mulally's leadership than any other CEO in decades. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/8/2020 at 12:46 PM, akirby said:

Not sold on Farley as CEO but he can’t be as bad as Pete makes out.

 

Agreed but can't really be sure what Farley has really done other than getting himself promoted a lot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ice-capades said:

 

Agreed but can't really be sure what Farley has really done other than getting himself promoted a lot. 

He ran Ford Europe for a few years, although I think Steve Odell did all the hard work closing down plants there before Farley arrived

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

General comment about Ford management... The Company with few exceptions has been badly mismanaged for decades. The corporate culture has been about Dearborn based executives making short term decisions that would protect their positions and bonuses rather than making decisions that would benefit the Company, the product and Ford customers long term. That changed with Alan Mulally with substantially improved product, better product development, Dealer relations, etc. and then Mark Fields threw out the Mulally handbook and everything went back to the way it was before. Mulally was the best CEO in decades and the best for the times. It's easy to say that he couldn't or wouldn't deal with today's changing market situation without discounting the forward thinking approach that served the Company so well under his tenure.

Edited by ice-capades
grammer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, ice-capades said:

General comment about Ford management... The Company with few exceptions has been badly mismanaged for decades. The corporate culture has been about Dearborn based executives making short term decisions that would protect their positions and bonuses rather than making decisions that would benefit the Company, the product and Ford customers long term. That changed with Alan Mulally with substantially improved product, better product development, etc. and then Mark Fields through out the Mulally handbook and everything went back to the way it was before. Mulally was the best CEO in decades and the best for the times. It's easy to say that he couldn't or wouldn't deal with today's changing market situation without discounting the forward thinking approach that served the Company so well under his tenure.

 

I'd argue they've had terrible leadership for over 100 years. They have survived in spite of mismanagement purely on the product.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MY93SHO said:

Did your fingers burst into flames after you typed that?

I once argued in favor of permitting Marijuana use by militiary members with a LT. Col.

 

I will call out bullshit wherever, whenever, with whomever. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, J-150 said:

 

I'd argue they've had terrible leadership for over 100 years. They have survived in spite of mismanagement purely on the product.

Even back to HF1 and his need to micro manage a rapidly expanding Ford, he just couldn't let go and trust subordinates to do their job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont discount the possibility of "two Jims" or some of the other stuff in Pete's article, but the way he hand waves away any notion that Farley should get any credit for Ford of Europe's turnaround is a pretty big flag that his sources, and he, all have too much axe to grind. Let's not forget that Pete was positively glowing about Mark Fields taking the helm. I'm willing to give Jim a shot, even if he is a bit tyrannical, especially if HTT is there in the mix making sure the product is done right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Moosetang said:

I dont discount the possibility of "two Jims" or some of the other stuff in Pete's article, but the way he hand waves away any notion that Farley should get any credit for Ford of Europe's turnaround is a pretty big flag that his sources, and he, all have too much axe to grind. Let's not forget that Pete was positively glowing about Mark Fields taking the helm. I'm willing to give Jim a shot, even if he is a bit tyrannical, especially if HTT is there in the mix making sure the product is done right.

He's never forgiven Jim Farley for ending his company's advertising contract with Ford,

makes mention of it again in the article but doesn't declare his own interest in that deal.

 

PDL is also on the outer at GM , he wasn't invited to the C8 Corvette event, you could tell

he was sore about that. Maybe any good will be had is now all used up, burnt bridges?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×