The Emperors' New Clothes, GM, Ford, Chrysler

[Richard Danjin <dickatriver@mac.com>]

       The level of collective psychological denial at these corporations is nothing short of criminal.  
But, let's be clear about why these corporations find themselves in their current dilemma, in terms of responsibility and accountability.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                                Paragraph (8)	The right to hire; promote; discharge or discipline for cause; and 
                                to maintain discipline and efficiency of employees, is the sole responsibility of the
                                Corporation except that Union members shall not be discriminated against as such.
                                In addition, the products to be manufactured, the location of the plants, the 
                                schedules of production, the methods, processes and means of manufacturing are
                                solely and exclusively the responsibility of the Corporation.

                                Agreement Between UAW and the General Motors Corporation, September 18, 2003 
                                (Effective October 6, 2003).  Page 13.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

       This language and, almost identical language, existing in Ford and Chrysler Agreements too, has been unchanged since the early 1960's.  Nothing that has been negotiated since, mitigates this language (Management's Rights) in any sense or way.
      I have been involved with these corporations - most specifically GM - starting in 1963 on the Shop Floor of a very large, very old Detroit manufacturing plant, eventually working at all levels of GM, at the executive vice president level, including working for over two years directly with the president of Saturn Corporation, as his contractual partner, until my retirement in 1998.  
       The corporations have hired the best and brightest from the world's universities.  In my years of experience these corporations have hired every known consultant, at huge expense, which any reader can remember, to use in their Industrial Relations, Organizational Development, Education and Training, and Quality Assurances activities.   I can assure you that there is no lack of Ph.D. statisticians, economists, or psychologists/psychiatrists of every ilk at GM.  The same can be said for the technical side of the enterprise- in terms of engineers and designers.  
      As to the financial side of these corporations, they are the masters of "Dark Economics."  The corporations can go from a $250 million loss projection to a $10 billion loss projection in less than 6 months.  (See Ford, Chrysler losses projected this past week; GM's $10 billion loss came as a complete surprise to CEO Wagoner, less than 6 months after announcing marginal profits).  Are we to believe these corporations simply did not know enough about their organizations to mislay or discover sums of money unimaginable (talk about statistically stable systems) or that they play at financial system "Dark Economics" at an esoteric level (purposefully) that not even the SEC or Wall Street can understand?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                                 When viewed from the perspective of the worker:
                                 The essential purpose and function of management is to create and operationalize
                                 an organizational structure to control and disseminate the resources in the system,
                                 in order to capacitate and enable workers to do tasks within a defined field of 
                                 discretion, in a safe workplace; and in a manner that does not require a worker
                                 to expend any physical or mental energy fighting the system to do their job.

                                 Dick Danjin. March 1993.  Making things run well; a paradigm shift:  use the 
                                 perspective of a worker and the result will be...? in Journal for Quality and 
                                 Participation, pages 40-44.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

       IMHO, this is management's job/task.  Only after management has exercised its "sole" responsibility and has its system statistically stable at 85% prove-able efficiency, then, and only then, should the discussions about Taylor's Scientific Management vs. Humanistic Management be addressed.  Why is it that systemic efficiency and statistically measured first time quality (Goldblatt's through put) is absent from dialog or literature?  By the way, I am speaking of white collar and blue collar workers in service and manufacturing systems and any combination thereof.
       Don't forget, Deming was saying 80% management, 20% worker in the 1980s and by the time of his death, he was saying 95% management, 5% workers.
       The three corporations fooled a lot of people and institutions, for over 40 years, into thinking that their aim was the motor vehicle business.  My awareness was, as early as 1982, that GM in particular, was not in the motor vehicle business, but their aim was and IMHO still is, the "stackable bale-able dollar bill" business.   I shared this with Deming in 1986.  
       IMHO, the Deming Community has a once in a lifetime case study learning opportunity at this point in history.  The learning is published in the press, in real time.  The academic regurgitation (journal studies, books and dissertations) are just someone's story.
       Thanks for tolerating my rambling.

Making Things Run Well

Dick Danjin
2450 Campfire Trail
Alger, Mi 48610