General Motors drew attention when it chose Mary Barra as ch

General Motors drew attention when it chose Mary Barra as chief executive, because she is the first female CEO of a major automobile corporation. Barra, who has spent her entire career at GM, started as an engineering intern, rose through the ranks, and held executive positions as vice president of human resources and senior vice president for global product development. Despite her impressive career, Barra shifted the focus from the historic nature of her appointment, saying GM would remain committed to the profitability and sales goals defined by her predecessor.

However, it quickly became apparent that Barra would have to change direction. Months after her appointment, the company admitted that ignition switches on many GM cars were malfunctioning. A nudge on the switch would move the key into the off position, shutting down the engine—and the air bag system. Reports connected the problem to dozens of crashes and at least 13 deaths. Worse, GM allegedly knew about the problem for months or years without recalling the cars. GM launched an investigation, as did Congress and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Meanwhile, GM suspended (with pay) two engineers involved with the development of the ignition switch and the small-car line in which it is installed. Barra also replaced several executives who left the company, though she did not associate their departures with the ignition switch. Among those who left was the vice president of global vehicle engineering, John Calabrese. Leading up to his retirement, Calabrese worked on a restructuring that included splitting his position into a head of vehicle development and a vice president of global product integrity, responsible for preventing safety problems. GM also more than doubled its safety investigator positions.

The results of the internal investigation indicated that employees throughout GM had failed to notice or act on evidence that the ignition switches had a potentially dangerous design flaw. One employee, an engineer handling the switch design, came in for the most criticism. Evidence showed him being aware that the switch failed to meet specifications, struggling to find a solution, and then signing off on the component. Later, when another engineer raised questions about the switch’s performance, he started writing replies but never sent any. Several years later, he approved a design change without following a standard practice: changing the part number to create evidence that the design had changed and when. Therefore, it was extremely difficult to spot the existence of a problem and determine which cars contained which version of the switch. GM dismissed the engineer along with 14 other employees, the majority of them executives. Five other GM employees were disciplined but not terminated. CEO Barra announced that these actions marked the beginning of an effort to replace a corporate culture tolerant of incompetence with one committed to taking responsibility.

Questions

1. Within months of Barra’s appointment as CEO and during the time of the internal investigation, several executives departed the company. Does this suggest that GM was managing turnover effectively? Explain.

2. What disciplinary steps did GM say it took with regard to the engineer responsible for its ignition switch? How consistent are these steps with the principles of progressive discipline?

Solution

1. ofcourse they managed turnover successfully, but the existing people well known about the process and the system. where the new people will requires some time to understand about it. to run an organisation, man power is required but they should be skilled manpower only. otherwise they can not contribut any thing to the organisation.

2. there a was a mistake happen in the manufacturing proceess. ofcource the engineers are the responsible, it does not mean that blame them and replace them. all the department heads should sit together and give their support to the engineers, what ever they are looking for, remaining has to ready to deliver.

the ignition process should be check and if requires, reprocess the system. a continuous and constant efforts only will help them to come out from the problem.