三问通用汽车

    而在底特律的文艺复兴中心总部，通用的高层们也许自我感觉良好。通用讨厌的“政府汽车”标签将在一年后随着美国财政部（U.S. Treasury）出售最后的通用股份而剥落。此外，政府所有制的终结意味着通用可以开出更高的工资追逐汽车业界的顶尖人才，他们的高管也能够因此终止与商务航班的飞行常客项目。通用在开始投资过去以及未来的问题上也感到足够乐观。同时，通用宣布在凤凰城附近成立第四个美国信息技术中心，还将雇佣1,000名员工。通用还称，已同意买下拥有133年历史的杜兰特•多特运输公司工厂（Durant-Dort Carriage Co.），用来展示公司的历史。这个工厂位于弗林特，是通用公司的发源地。

    那么还有什么要担心的问题吗？下面是目前困扰通用管理层的三大问题：

    1、我们公司的竞争优势是什么？通用公司是一个大公司，但是福特和大众（Volkswagen）更善于利用它们巨大的规模和平台来高效运作。通用的汽车做工精良，但是质量和可靠性的名声远小于丰田（Toyota）和本田（Honda）。而当顾客考虑到安全性、技术性或燃油经济性时，也无法将通用列为自己的第一选择。

    2、我们做得最好的领域是什么？也许只有如大型跨界车（雪佛兰Traverse、GMC Acadia、别克Enclave）和全尺寸越野车（雪佛兰Suburban、GMC Yukon、凯迪拉克Escalade）这类利基产品。凯迪拉克是奢侈客车市场的后起之秀，但仍难望德国车之项背。福特依然是小货车的王者，除非有人能证明山外有山。在其他方面，通用汽车也都处于落后地位。

    3、主席和首席执行官丹•阿克森之后，我们应该选谁当继任者？现年64岁的阿克森已经表示计划在三年内离职，但是通用的破产和裁员让能够接替他的整整一代高管流失。这导致领袖的竞争人选相对年轻：51岁的副主席史蒂夫•葛思基，51岁的产品开发主管玛丽•巴拉，49岁的北美区总裁马克•罗伊斯和41岁的首席财务官丹•阿曼。如果其中任何一人当选首席执行官，通用的董事会可能都会再找一位非执行主席来协助工作。不过，正如前主席和首席执行官爱德华•惠特克所说，目前的通用高层都不大情愿成为继任者。

    任何汽车公司的命运都与它们所依托的经济形势休戚相关，通用自然不例外。形势很好或者较好时，汽车公司就能健康地盈利；而到了困难时期，汽车公司也会困难重重。综合美国经济的基础，汽车厂商的历史和通用新产品替换的节奏来看，通用在美国将会延续良好的表现。对于它能力的真正考验在下次经济衰退时才会到来。在欧洲，通用正着手进行长期的努力，而它的计划能否最终让公司重新回到盈利的水平，一切在2016年之前尚不明了。在中国，只要通用能继续紧跟竞争者的步伐，就应该能够继续笑傲市场，除非遭遇自然或政治灾难。

    罗杰•史密斯于1981至1990年担任通用的主席和首席执行官。他常常说，他的业绩既不像他的朋友们认为的那样好，也不像敌人们控诉的那样坏。如今的通用正是如此。（财富中文网）

    译者：严匡正

    Down at Renaissance Center headquarters in Detroit, GM's brass should be feeling pretty good about itself. The "Government Motors" tag that GM hated should become obsolete a year from now when the U.S. Treasury sells the last of its GM shares. Among other things, the end of government ownership means GM can start competing for top automotive talent with higher pay packages and allow its executives to discontinue their frequent flier programs on commercial airliners and fly corporate again. GM also feels optimistic enough to start investing in its past as well as its future. At the same time that it announced a fourth U.S. information technology center near Phoenix that will employ 1,000 people, it said it has agreed to buy the 133-year-old Durant-Dort Carriage Co. factory in Flint where it was born, as a showcase for its corporate history.

    So what's to worry? Here are three big questions that ought to be weighing on GM management right now:

    1. What is our corporate competitive advantage? GM is a huge company, but both Fordand Volkswagen make better use of their enormous scale with platform efficiencies. GM builds well-made vehicles, but its reputation for quality and reliability can't touch Toyota's(TM) or Honda's (HMC). Nor, when customers go looking for the leader in safety, technology, or fuel economy, do they make a GM dealer their first stop.

    2. Where are we the world's best? Probably only in niche categories like large crossovers (Chevy Traverse, GMC Acadia, Buick Enclave) and full-size SUVs (Chevy Suburban, GMC Yukon, Cadillac Escalade). Cadillac is a rising star in the luxury passenger car segment but still can't touch the Germans, and Ford remains the pickup truck leader until proven otherwise. Everywhere else, GM is an also-ran.

    3. Who are we going to pick to succeed chairman and CEO Dan Akerson? Akerson, 64, has signaled that he plans to leave within three years, but GM's bankruptcy and downsizing wiped out a whole generation of executives who might logically have followed him. As a result, the leading inside contenders are relative youngsters: vice-chairman Steve Girsky, 51, product development chief Mary Barra, also 51, North American boss Mark Reuss, 49, and CFO Dan Ammann, 41. If any one of them is named CEO, the GM board would likely want to find a non-executive chairman to work in tandem with them, but as former chairman and CEO Ed Whitacre has noted, the current cast of GM directors has been reluctant volunteers when asked to step up.

    The fate of any auto company has always been tied to the direction of the economies in which they operate, and GM is no different. When times are flush, or relatively so, they become healthily profitable; when times are hard, automakers suffer too. The fundamentals of the American economy, the age of the automotive fleet, and GM's new product replacement cadence suggest that it should continue to do well in the U.S. The true test of its abilities won't come until the next downturn. In Europe, GM is buckling down for the long term, and the success of its plan to get back to profitability won't be clear until 2016. China should continue to be a winner, barring natural or political disaster, as long as GM can continue to keep pace with its competitors.

    Roger Smith, GM's Chairman and CEO from 1981 to 1990, liked to say that he was doing neither as well as his friends suggested, or as poorly as his enemies charged. The same is true of GM today.