Blog > Category: Leader
It is hard to believe it was only a year ago that General Motors emerged from bankruptcy. How much difference a year has made! GM is now solidly profitable, growing its revenues once again, and retooling its lineup of automobiles. It is on the verge of a public offering that will enable the U.S. government to recoup the investment from its “bailout.”
GM’s fall into bankruptcy was more like a steady decline over fifty years, as its U.S. market share tumbled from 53 percent to a meager 19 percent. In spite of their loyalty to “Buy American,” many GM customers turned to higher quality, better designed vehicles made by GM’s Japanese and European competitors. Most younger buyers never began buying GM cars. A steady stream finance-trained executives – from Roger and Jack Smith to Rick Wagoner – focused on short-term actions to maintain some semblance of quarterly earnings while denying that GM’s autos were no longer competitive.
Every time union negotiations came around, these CEOs gave away the store to the UAW in order to avoid a strike, while the long-term obligations for health care, pensions, paying laid off workers, and work rule inflexibility just kept piling up. The GM board of directors was just as complacent as the management, and kept appointing finance executives without ever addressing the company’s long-term strategic issues.
When the end came in early 2009, President Obama had the courage to finance the company to bring it out of bankruptcy. Even more importantly, he appointed a highly successful board chair in Ed Whitacre, who became CEO four months later. Whitacre gained his reputation as the nation’s most successful telecommunications executive, as the chair and CEO of SBC who saved ATT from its demise. While Republicans moaned that the government was running the company, Whitacre told me that the Obama administration gave him and the new GM board complete freedom to run the company.
Ed Whitacre’s remarkable leadership had monumental impact in rapidly turning around this lumbering giant. His one-year tenure marked a dramatic shift in the old way of doing business at General Motors, as the days of redundant bureaucracy and disjointed innovation quickly ceased. Whitacre abandoned GM’s moribund committee system that protected executives from being held accountable for results, and made clear, decisive decisions while challenging his troops to move fast – much faster.
Whitacre even put himself on the line by appearing in GM advertisements, heralding the new GM and challenging customers to give GM cars a try while offering them their money back if they weren’t satisfied. He got a break earlier this year when arch-rival Toyota ran into quality problems, but he moved quickly to take advantage of the opportunity, ramping up production rates and sales and marketing efforts. GM still has a long way to go to catch up with Ford, whose highly successful CEO Alan Mulally started retooling Ford’s product lineup four years ago, but GM’s trajectory is solid.
Since turning over the CEO reins to successor Dan Akerson, Whitacre has received some undeserved criticism for stepping down after just one year. But this has been his intention ever since he took on the CEO title. He noted, “It was my plan all along…to help return this company to greatness and I didn’t want to stay a day beyond that.” He is a man of his word, and he delivered on every promise and commitment he made.
Cheers to Ed Whitacre for a job well done.
On August 13 and 14, 2010, I will be leading a unique seminar on “Mindful Leadership” in conjunction with an extraordinary teacher, Yongey Mingur Rinpoche, the well-known Tibetan Buddhist meditation master. This two-day retreat will be held at the Continuing Education Conference Center on the University of Minnesota’s St. Paul campus.
“Mindful Leadership” is the meeting of East and West as Mingyur Rinpoche and I explore the integration of the principles of Buddhist mindfulness meditation with True North leadership. This seminar represents a bold new paradigm in which meditation training is combined with leadership principles to develop mindful leaders dedicated to creating a more peaceful and harmonious world.
Each day will begin with the teaching of Mingyur Rinpoche, including experiential meditation, followed by interactive dialogue between the two leaders and participants, featuring these topics:
- Developing Self-Awareness
- Crucibles & Understanding Your Life Story
- Developing Self Esteem
- Mindful Meditation for Reflection and Introspection
- Shared Awareness through Group Support
- Leading Others Mindfully
- Self-Actualization & Creating A Better World
Over 150 leaders have already registered for this seminar. The cost is $195 for the two days, or $95 for students or seniors over 65. You may register here or at www.tergar.org. Out-of-town participants may want to consider staying at the Ramada Plaza Minneapolis, 1330 Industrial Blvd., Minneapolis, MN.
As the minutes ticked away in the U.S.’ decisive World Cup match against Algeria, U.S. superstar Landon Donovan was determined not to permit a repeat of the U.S. 2006 World Cup disaster, when the Americans went home without a single victory. As his teammates felt their 2010 dreams slipping away, Donovan knew the soccer hopes of the nation rested on his shoulder. This time he could not fail.
As the U.S. saw chance after chance denied by the tenacious Algerian defenders and a lone goal disallowed on a missed call by the referee, even the neutral announcers declared the U.S. deserved to win. This time around an older and wiser Landon Donovan knew deserving success and achieving it are two different things.
Taking an outlet pass from his keeper, he raced down the hundred meter field, looking more like a track star than the crafty midfielder he is, and played the ball forward to teammate Jozi Altidore. When the Algerian keeper pushed away yet another shot, Donovan didn’t hold back. Moving forward toward the goal, he pounced on the loose ball and drove into the back of the net. Pandemonium erupted in the stadium and throughout the U.S. as the entire team piled on top of Donovan’s prostrate body.
When the game ended two minutes later, Donovan buried his head in tears. All he could say to the announcer was “We worked so hard the last four years, we couldn’t let this opportunity slip away.”
What enabled Landon Donovan to rise to this leadership moment? The answers can be found in the disappointments he has suffered from the 2006 letdown, to disappointments playing in Germany and a failed marriage in 2009.
Since he was a teenager, soccer watchers have seen Donovan’s potential to become America’s first world-class soccer player and fulfill the dreams of American soccer lovers. After a solid debut as a 20-year-old on the 2002 U.S. World Cup team that reached the quarter-finals, Donovan was expected to lead the Americans to even greater success in 2006.
It never happened. More than any sporting event in the world, the World Cup is an intense national competition that requires both mental and physical toughness. In 2006, Donovan hadn’t learned what that required. Nor was he prepared to step up to the leadership role expected by his teammates and his country.
Needing a win against Ghana to advance to the Round of 16, the U.S. instead lost the match and was eliminated. Donovan and his teammates earned only a single point in three games. Donovan himself had a rough ride, as he went scoreless and was criticized by U.S. fans for a soft, directionless performance.
Things didn’t get any easier for Donovan after the Cup. He endured difficult stints playing professional soccer in Germany where he only occasionally saw time on the pitch. He endured a difficult breakup with his wife and additional professional strife when news broke of a rift with world-renowned David Beckham, Donovan’s L.A. Galaxy teammate.
But Donovan did more than just “play through” the tough times. He dug deep into the root cause of his problems, and used his self-exploration to grow as a player, a person, and a leader. He even took up meditation to become more introspective.
Donovan told FanHouse.com that his recent struggles made him realize that all-important leadership lesson: the buck stops with him. “I am in control of what I do,” Donovan said, “and before, I thought different things determined how I would play or how I would respond or how I would act on the field.”
That sort of take-charge leadership style has propelled Donovan to new heights. He received the MLS MVP award in 2009 and won the championship with the Galaxy. On the world stage last week, as the U.S. stared at a 2-0 deficit at halftime against Slovenia, Donovan’s new calm and resolve showed through. In the third minute of the second half, he ignited a U.S. rally with a perfectly slotted ball from an impossible angle. When the U.S.’ winning goal was called by another erroneous call, he shrugged it off, saying, “We will focus on what we can control.”
Landon Donovan has learned from the searing pain of his personal crucibles. Rather than deny his disappointments, instead he used them to become a more mature leader, ready for the burdens of leadership placed on his shoulders by his teammates and his country. As the pressure mounted, he played through fatigue and disappointment and somehow kept going at a tireless rate.
When the opportunity presented itself, he didn’t flinch or choke. As he said, “in that instant, time just stopped,” no doubt as he recognized the chance to overcome the pain of the past and achieve his goal. Afterward he even thanked his ex-wife on national television for her help.
Was Donovan lucky? Not exactly, unless you believe (as I do) in Oprah Winfrey’s definition of luck as “preparation meeting opportunity.”
Now Donovan leads the U.S. team against Ghana on Saturday in the playoff round, with a chance to revenge the difficult 2006 loss. He is a battle-tested leader, who has learned to share the pressure, excitement, and joy of the World Cup with his teammates and now-loyal fans. As the Italian and French superstars head for home, Landon Donovan has learned from his crucible and is ready to lead with confidence.
America finds itself confronting a host of problems – from environmental crises to reform on Wall Street, Congress has no shortage of pressing issues to tackle. One issue stands out to me, however, as particularly important in the effort to attract America’s next generation of global leaders: America needs immigration reform for legal immigrants.
Ever since September 11, 2001, America has been making life extremely difficult for legal immigrants who want to stay in this country, start companies and contribute to the growth of the U.S. economy. In recent years all the focus has been on the 13 million illegal immigrants currently in the country.
From 19th century industrialists like Scottish-American Andrew Carnegie to Yahoo’s Jerry Yang, PepsiCo’s Indra Nooyi, Google’s Sergey Brin, or Harvard Business School’s recently nominated dean Nitin Nohria, immigrants continue to occupy important positions of leadership in creating and driving the next generation of American businesses to success. Many foreign students come to the U.S. to study at our great universities and stay to study medicine, science or business in America’s leading graduate schools. Yet they are sent back home as their student visas expire. It pains me to see so many of my Harvard Business School students who are sent back to China, India, Africa and many other countries and watch them found dynamic countries there instead of doing so in the U.S.
Leaders who come to America from abroad play a key role in driving companies forward – they fuse together ideas from different cultures, help to disseminate best practices from across the globe, and import new models of innovation from abroad. Moreover, the multinational business networks that these immigrants bring with them can also enable companies to tap into new supply chains and access customers in previously unreachable markets, key competitive advantages in an increasingly interconnected economy.
New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, who writes frequently about immigration reform, hits the nail on the head when he describes immigration as a key generator of new and innovative ideas, products, and people that infuse and enrich America’s business community. Critical outside perspective, along with knowledge of foreign markets and best practices outside our borders, are keys to successfully navigating today’s global marketplace.
Politicians would do well to focus on immigration reform for these legal immigrants by expanding the H1b visas for graduates of American graduates, rather than mixing these straightforward issues with the highly complex issues like border security and amnesty. Congress needs to pay particular attention to the following core issues in considering immigration reform:
Retaining students. America’s higher education system is unrivaled in attracting the world’s top engineers, doctors, lawyers, and businessmen to study at its universities. A reformed system should ensure that those who come to the US to study and earn advanced degrees receive a fast-track to citizenship.
Increasing the number of skilled worker visas. Increasing the ceiling on the number of H-1B visas for skilled workers ensures that America continues to attract the top set of leaders. A 2006 study by Duke University found that immigrant entrepreneurs in the United States founded 25.3% of all engineering and technology firms over the past decade, generating an estimated $52 billion (in 2005 dollars) in sales and creating 450,000 jobs. Today only 65,000 H-1B visas are issued per year, despite some 163,000 applications in 2008. These rejected applications represent almost 100,000 workers every year who could dynamically contribute to our nation’s economy and help launch the next generation of entrepreneurial start-ups.
Involve the business community. With such high stakes in an immigration reform bill, Congress needs to ensure that all voices are heard in the debate, particularly those of the business community. To this end, major companies like Cisco, Genentech, and Coca-Cola have formed a coalition, Compete America, to advocate for immigration reform on behalf of the business community.
The bid to attract the world’s top intellectual capital is escalating. Australia, Canada just completed immigration reform overhauls to boost their attractiveness to would-be migrants to the United States. Moreover, countries like China, India, and South Korea, long exporters of their country’s top talent, are fast becoming major centers of innovation and reversing the diaspora of intellectual capital. While ideas like the recently introduced “Start-Up Visa Act” in the Senate are positive starting points on the road to reform, America urgently needs to retool its immigration system to retain and attract the next generation of entrepreneurs and leaders. Without reform, we could very well face a future void of the next Intel, Sun Microsystems, or Google.
Harvard President Drew Faust’s announcement that Nitin Nohria will become Dean of Harvard Business School is indeed welcome news. President Faust has made a visionary choice in Nohria. He is a transformative leader who has the depth and insight to understand the role of business education in developing global business leaders who recognize that their responsibilities transcend immediate requirements for short-term results.
Nohria is a scholar, a leader, and a remarkable human being who represents the best of Harvard Business School. He has mentored more faculty members, myself included, than anyone can count. His research has centered on critical questions such as what drives human motivation and what shapes leaders and sustained achievement.
Nitin and I have taught together for seven years, first in the new required course, Leadership and Corporate Accountability, then in the Seminar for New CEOs, and most recently in the new elective course, Authentic Leadership Development. During our years as colleagues, Professor Nohria has consistently taught students and fellow faculty members the principles and practice of authentic leadership.
American business is emerging from a crisis of leadership. After a lost decade in which many leaders focused on maximizing short-term shareholder value, the American economy needs to refocus on reestablishing the trust in business as a sector that contributes to the well-being of society. Nohria will lead the new generation of leadership at the helm of Harvard Business School during a period in which the business world cries out for authentic leaders focused on creating long-term sustainable value.
Nohria’s remarks upon the announcement are characteristic of his leadership: “With business education at an inflection point, we must strive to equip future leaders with the competence and character to address emerging global business and social challenges.” He is focused on what matters most: developing authentic leaders who can empower thousands of others to lead. The world needs innovative leaders who can master the complexities of the global economy.
Congratulations to Nitin, and the faculty, administration, and classes of future leaders at Harvard Business School who will join with him in transforming business education and leadership to create a better society.
Harvard Business Review is hosting a six-week long blog series on how leadership will look in the future. They've brought together many different perspectives and conversations on the topic of leadership and posted them on their site. These conversations will help shape the upcoming Leadership Colloquium, “Imagining the Future of Leadership,” that will be hosted by Nitin Nohria, Rakesh Kharana, and Scott Snook at Harvard Business School in June 11-12. This symposium is a great opportunity to bring together a broad range of ideas on leadership.
My contribution to the conversation looks at New 21st Century Leaders. Some of these thoughts and conversations steamed from my March Wall Street Journal - "The New Leaders: Collaborative, Not Commanding."
For the full article:
Harvard Business Review - The New 21st Century Leaders
It’s no secret I have been critical of General Motors management, right up to its bankruptcy filing a year ago. For decades, GM management focused on short-term profits, while it was steadily losing market share – from 53 percent of the U.S. market all the way down to 19 percent. Along the way it was unable to keep pace with international competitors or shifting customer demand and concessions in work rules, health care and pensions to its union that caused the firm to fail when the market collapsed in the fall of 2008.
All that changed rapidly when the Obama administration appointed Ed Whitacre as its chair in July 2009. Whitacre, the highly successful ex-CEO of ATT, took over as CEO as well last fall and immediately started transforming GM into a modern auto company that could compete in both the U.S. and world markets.
He went out on a limb and promised GM would return to profitability within two years and repay its debts to the United States government within seven years. At the time GM was still in the red, while Ford was thriving and Toyota was outpacing both in worldwide production and sales. Furthermore, American consumers were distrustful of General Motors quality and angry that their tax dollars had been used to keep the company on life support.
When Toyota encountered its quality problems earlier this year, Whitacre moved in high gear to capture the available market share. Now he has taken action to fulfill his promises. Not only has General Motors repaid its loan with interest from the United States government, it has continued to improve customer service. Currently, GM is projecting ambitious global growth in 2010 and 2011. In the coming months, the company plans to initiate a public sale of stock, allowing the automaker to regain its independence from the U.S. government.
How did this turnaround happen so rapidly? How did Whitacre restore a bankrupt giant, repay billions to the government, and make bold growth projections for the future?
Whitacre made the tough internal decisions. He shed unprofitable brands like Saturn, Hummer, Saab, and Pontiac, eliminated layers of management, abandoned the company’s fossil-like committee structure, reduced excess global inventory, and closed 1,350 underperforming dealerships. Those were not popular decisions internally or with GM’s bloated dealer structure. But they were necessary steps to shed its losses and transition away from the finance-driven “analysis paralysis” that dominated its management for four decades.
He became the face of the company with the public. With public speeches, press interviews, and even starring in company ads, Whitacre put himself on the line with the American public. Americans wanted a real leader at the helm of GM, and Whitacre was willing to be that person.
He regained trust in the company. By backing up his public promises – and offering himself up as the new face of GM, Whitacre lent personality and warmth to a brand that had become a concrete monolith of stagnation. At risk to his impressive professional career, Whitacre put his reputation on the line. He fought for new customers by making promises about GM’s autos and trucks and their quality, even offering a “money back guarantee.” If nothing else, Americans respect a confident, trustworthy leader who is trying to restore respect for a tattered institutional brand.
He’s not done yet. Whitacre is not one who rests when a preliminary goal is met. In his recent television spot and speeches, it’s clear that he and GM management are focused on improving GM’s product lineup while fulfilling its promises to its customers.
At a time when so many leaders have failed, Americans are pleased to rally around a corporate comeback story built on trust and quality assurance. With Ed Whitacre still at the helm, it’s a comeback story that could keep going for years to come.
Penny and I just returned from Zurich where we spent a remarkable three days with His Holiness the Dalai Lama. We were there as part of the Mind and Life Institute meeting of economists, scientists, contemplatives, and concerned citizens trying to make the world a better place. The subject was a first-ever dialogue on "Compassion and Altruism in Economic Systems."
The first day we heard some impressive new research that refutes what the classical economists have been telling us for three decades, which is that people only operate in their self-interest. Quite to the contrary, new economic research demonstrates conclusively that most people express empathy and compassion for others, even when they incur a considerable cost. Furthermore, new findings in neuroscience using fMRI technology indicate that actual changes take place in the brain when people express compassion and empathy and that this tends to reduce their destructive emotions.
On the second day we witnessed some remarkable practical applications, from micro-finance, to educating illiterate women, to powering small villages using only solar power. Very inspiring.
On the third day I was given the opportunity to engage the Dalai Lama in a discussion about compassionate authentic leadership and the essential role that leaders must play in bringing a much stronger sense of compassion and altruism to organizations and the economy as a whole. After 15 minutes, I asked him how we could develop more leaders who were both compassionate and authentic and could sustain successful outcomes over an extended period of time.
He stated clearly that people are not born angry or hostile, but develop that way because of their inability to address their destructive emotions that exist due to difficulties they have faced in their lives. To overcome these negative feelings and be genuinely compassionate, leaders need to have a set of practices that they do routinely. Meditation is the obvious candidate, as I have experienced in my own life, but yoga, tai chi, physical exercise, massage, and other forms of relaxation therapy can achieve the same result.
The notion of contagion - that is, people drawing from the emotional state of others - that we heard about on the first day is relevant here as well. As leaders exude compassion and empathy in leading others, they cause other people to do the same, creating organizations that are more compassionate overall and able to sustain effective results.
The key to doing so is having a common sense of purpose, or mission, and practicing what the Dalai Lama terms "secular ethics." In using this phrase, he makes it clear that he is not talking about the Buddhist religion, but rather the practices that enable leaders to act in a manner consistent with their values, even under extreme pressure.
For all the challenges we face in the world, I believe there is much that non-Buddhists can learn from Buddhist practices that will enable us to lead more effectively and develop compassionate organizations that can sustain high levels of performance.
“A good compromise leaves everyone slightly unhappy.”
Today’s leaders ought to frame that phrase and hang it on their office walls. Regardless of their chosen arena – be it business, religion, the military, politics – etc., every leader should do a gut check, and ask “When is the last time I actually compromised?” I don’t mean in terms of compromised principles – those ought to never waver. I’m referring to those moments when you placed the long-term good of two parties ahead of the short-term good of one. When you actually gave up something – and really hurt because of it – with the hope that it would yield something better, later. When you lost, to gain.
No one wants to give up something important today for something uncertain tomorrow. No one wants to bring harm – financial, military, political, or social – to themselves or the potential tens of thousands of people they represent. This is true especially when that decision depends on putting trust in a rival or unknown party.
But a genuine compromise forces us to do so. Compromise leaves leaders vulnerable in their temporary defenselessness. And for the leaders of today – or any day – that is a position we’re taught to avoid, particularly in our capitalist culture where confidence can sometimes be as important substance to closing a deal. And yet we’re in the financial position we face today in great part because of our leadership’s inability to enact real compromise.
Leaders on Wall Street failed to strike arrangements with boards and shareholders on reasonable long-term growth projections, leaving them pursuing untenable gains and inflating the economic bubble. Leaders on Capitol Hill have often failed to relinquish ideology on healthcare, climate change, and financial reform in the interests of progress for the constituents they serve, leaving them (and us) with arguably the most partisan political system in American history.
We’re living in a highly volatile time made worse by dire economic straits, and we’re growing increasingly unable to take the time to understand each other, and concede personal interests for the greater interests of the whole. The media is more segmented than at any time in a generation. The stratification of social classes is increasing. We, as a nation, are increasingly polarized. To right the ship, we need leaders who can rediscover the true nature of compromise.
I’m no idealist. I know how the world works – I’ve lived too long, and done too much in the business world, not to. And it’s with that knowledge I can say that our ability to move the progress needle rests on our leaders’ collective ability to think, “what can I give up to move forward?”
Then, that leader should give a little more. Pragmatism isn’t always elegant. But it works.
Originally Posted on Harvard Business School Working Knowledge
Toyota's tragic automobile recalls offer a historic opportunity for Ford's CEO Alan Mulally and General Motors' new CEO Ed Whitacre. After years of decline, they can reestablish the preeminence of American-made autos if they are wise at leading through this crisis.
In the past month Toyota has recalled almost 9 million vehicles—more than the entire number it sold the past three years. The irony is that Toyota gained significant market share in the past decade at the expense of its American competitors by offering superior quality vehicles. Now quality has become Toyota's Achilles' heel.
"This [process] will take enormous effort, ingenuity, and discipline along with massive investments."
No doubt Toyota will regain some of its lost market share in the short term, to the extent the automaker's production systems can respond by increasing production rates without incurring problems of their own. The bigger question is, will Ford and GM be able to capitalize on this opportunity for the long term?
I was with Whitacre when he initially learned that Toyota was suspending sales of 57 percent of its autos sold in the United States. He responded immediately by directing his executives to ramp-up production as quickly as possible.
While Whitacre and Mulally maximize current sales, taking advantage of this opportunity in the near term is not a long-term strategy. All too often, both GM and Ford have squandered similar opportunities by simply raising prices and profits, as they did during the three-year import quotas in the mid-1980s. They must recognize that no matter how wounded Toyota is in the short term by its quality problems, this company is a very tough and able competitor that will move quickly to revamp its quality and its product offerings.
On the march
GM and Ford need to move aggressively to secure their market share gains by investing windfall profits to make their auto lineups more competitive for the next decade. That means introducing new designs that offer attractive features, improved fuel efficiency, and better customer value along with superior quality. This will take enormous effort, ingenuity, and discipline along with massive investments.
In this regard, Ford has the jump on GM. When Mulally was hired from Boeing in 2006, Ford was in trouble. The company was stretched thin with too many product lines spanning too many countries and appealing to too few consumers. Mulally's first act was to borrow $23.5 billion by mortgaging the entire company to give Ford the runway necessary to retool its aging lineup.
Mulally moved fast, trimming unpopular lines, cutting management layers, and insisting on an R&D overhaul that hurt short-term profits. Having weathered the 2008 crisis without U.S. government support, Ford has $23 billion in cash in the bank and a lineup of eco-friendly automobiles to which U.S. consumers are gravitating.
GM only emerged from bankruptcy last July, when Whitacre was installed by the Obama administration as its new board chair. Since that time, he has acted decisively, removing Fritz Henderson as CEO and assuming the mantle himself. Whitacre quickly reorganized the company from top to bottom, cut out layers of middle management, initiated new product development programs, and revamped GM's international sales and marketing. He also put himself on the firing line, publicly taking ownership for GM's turnaround and appearing in a series of advertisements challenging consumers to compare GM autos with its competitors.
Glimmers of Ford's and GM's potential shone brightly at the Detroit Auto Show last month. Mulally showcased his new model range. Car experts and reviewers alike agreed the new models revitalized Ford. Whitacre also unveiled a new line of cars, admittedly trailing Ford, particularly in hybrids. He boldly predicted GM would be profitable in 2010 and would pay off its government loans.
January sales for Ford and GM jumped 24 percent and nearly 14 percent, respectively, year over year, in spite of high unemployment and low consumer confidence.
Chrysler falls further
In contrast, look at Chrysler and its new CEO, Sergio Marchionne. He ambitiously projected that Chrysler would become profitable in 2010 on an 18 percent increase in sales. Instead, Chrysler sales dropped 8 percent in January. Marchionne has not been aggressive in revamping Chrysler vehicles, repositioning the company's brand, or reorganizing its beleaguered management. As a result, it is falling further behind and missing this golden opportunity.
The last and perhaps most important lesson for leaders going through a crisis is that they cannot just play defense by cutting costs and waiting for the crisis to pass. They have to go on offense simultaneously by transforming their organizations and investing heavily in revamping their products and their marketing to focus on winning now.
That's precisely what Mulally and Whitacre are doing. They may not be automobile industry veterans, but they are highly competitive leaders, skilled at winning in the marketplace. The American automobile industry is a lot stronger today because of their decisive, visionary leadership.
