mobile-menu-icon
GM Authority

The Power Of Global Products — And Why GM Is Still Behind The Curve

This article is part of the GM Authority Opinion Desk series, where you can see exactly what’s on the minds of the GM Authority crew.

Last month, Ford unveiled its launch plans for the 2012 Ford Focus — The Blue Oval’s most important vehicle launch of the year. In doing so, Ford made history by making the marketing and advertising campaign for the new Focus one in the same — everywhere around the world.

This means that — save for language differences during voice-overs and printed text — the ads will be one in the same, whether seen in Baltimore or Bangkok. So where is General Motors in all this? Unfortunately, The General is dawdling behind.

While Ford is focused on launching global cars — ones that are available as the same exact vehicle and under the same brand worldwide — GM has such anomalies as the Opel Insignia, Vauxhall Insignia, and Buick Regal. Now, I’m not about to stir up the age-old debate of whether GM — during its infamous 2009 bankruptcy — should have killed Buick and/or brought Opel to North America; but I will state the following: selling the same cars under three different brands around the world is an organizational nightmare that eventually leads to consumer confusion and brand disarray.

Global Brands = Global Vehicles?

One doesn’t need to be a marketing professional and have consulted with international firms, I can tell you first hand that most organizations value little else than what is in their own best interests. And the same can be said about divisions within an organization — such as Buick, Opel, and Vauxhall within General Motors. Imagine the situation that involves Buick executives pining for a soft-riding midsize sedan while the upper echelon at Opel correctly understanding that anything but a sure-footed and firm-suspended midsizer simply won’t cut it.

At the end of the day, there’s a power struggle that turns into a give-and-take relationship. What both divisions are left with is a product built on compromises — a vehicle that’s the result of negotiations (between GM’s own divisions) and what’s otherwise known in development circles as “cooperative push-and-pull.” Contrast that approach with a pure-bred Lexus, Mercedes, or BMW — where all parties are on the same page working towards a single vehicle with a single laser-focused vision — and it’s obvious why GM’s premium brands (Buick and Opel) are still lagging in image, cachet, profit margin, and market share when compared to the most undiluted brands from Germany and Japan (read: Lexus). But the lack of truly global brands and vehicles isn’t the only thing holding back the mighty General, since timing is at the heart of any product development effort.

Timing Is Everything

Let’s take, for example, the Chevrolet Cruze — a (stellar) vehicle that launched in Europe nearly three years ago but was only made available in the United States for the 2011 model year. Ironically, it was the U.S. market — not Europe — that needed the Cruze more than any of GM’s other markets.

The aging Cobalt that the Cruze replaced wasn’t only getting long-in-the-tooth, it was simply beginning to absolutely suck, especially in the face of new competitors such as the Honda Civic, Kia Forte, and Mitsubishi Lancer. So why did it take so long for the Cruze to come to the States? I’m not sure I know the answer… but, having driven Ford’s new Focus, I do know that the Cruze seems just a tad outdated, especially given the lack of certain distinguishing optional features such as all-wheel-drive, a backup camera, or even push-button start. The three years it took General Motors to bring the Cruze to the States was simply way too long, no matter which way you flip the coin. And no matter how great the Cruze may be, it has definitely aged since its initial European debut in 2008.

Decreased Costs

At the end of the day, what we’re left with is the fact that GM simply isn’t able to take advantage of the various benefits offered by a global vehicle launch in worldwide markets in a coordinated fashion (read: at the same time). What may those benefits be?

For starters, the ability to launch a uniform global marketing and ad campaign as Ford is doing with the new Focus. Such a campaign most definitely leads to increased economies of scale and — subsequently — decreased costs — very desirable things for a for-profit company. And what about the ability to create global buzz about a launch product? GM forgoes this benefit as well with a dis-synchronous launch of the Cruze across the globe. Not good.

Just think of the lunch-room conversations, “shares”, “likes” and “re-tweets” a synchronized global launch of the Focus is generating on today’s global connected community that we call the Internet. If you haven’t yet noticed, folks, the Focus has the buzz… a lot of it. So by launching vehicles in a haphazard manner across the globe, GM completely forgoes these massively viral conversations and fails to create as hot of a topic as they are capable of. The General also relinquishes the ability to generate immense amounts of global chatter by launching the same vehicle under different brand names worldwide — as it has with the Buick Regal/Opel Insignia/Vauxhall Insignia as well as the Buick Verano/Excelle and Opel Astra, let alone the upcoming Sonic that will be known as the Aveo in all markets except for the U.S..

Primarily A Marketing Problem

Needless to say, the issues described herein are ones of marketing, logistics, and product. But I would argue that all these hurdles stem solely from the marketing department.

If GM’s global marketing figured out the true mission of Opel/Vauxhall and Buick — and decided on a single brand going forward, then most of the issues described herein would simply disappear. As it stands today, it doesn’t seem that those responsible for GM’s Opel/Vauxhall and Buick brands can consistently explain the strategy behind the marquees, what they stand for, what they represent on a global scale, and what the target market is for each. And it’s no surprise that it’s a challenge defining a unified marketing proposition when Buick is getting a new director of marketing every six months. To that end, my question is how Opel (and Vauxhall) is different from Chevrolet in Europe, and just what is Buick’s primary competitor in North America? Ask different people within GM these very same questions — and you will be surprised at the variety of answers you will receive.

It stands to reason that if GM were to roll out products such as the Chevy Cruze and Orlando (and even the Camaro) on a global scale at the same time, it would be able to take full advantage of the combined global buzz stemming from the launch of such hot new vehicles. And the Cruze, Orlando, and Camaro aren’t the only examples of these fragmented efforts: identical (or nearly equivalent) vehicles such as the Chevy Volt and Opel Ampera as well as the Chevy Equinox (North America) and Captiva (everywhere except for North America) are also culprits.

As it is today, however, GM’s disjointed global brands (don’t even get me started on Holden and Daewoo) and dis-synchronous launches of global vehicles hinder its very own ability to generate tremendous amounts of initial product excitement (read: buzz), especially on social networks such as Twitter and Facebook, not to mention the water cooler conversations among the car guys at the office.

By contrast, Ford’s ability to initiate a coordinated global launch of the all-new Ford Focus — with the same (or very similar) ad campaigns all across the world — puts The Blue Oval in a position to enjoy decreased ad production costs while exponentially growing worldwide product excitement and chatter. Don’t think I’m right? Take a sample of people around the globe and see how many haven’t heard of the all-new Ford Focus or the Ford Focus Rally. I’d wager that this the number would point to a great global awareness of the new Focus. To my great dismay, this is something Chevrolet isn’t capable of replicating with the all-new Aveo/Sonic — since the new Gamma II-based vehicle will wear different nameplates around the world.

Off To A Good Start?

At the end of the day, Chevy Runs Deep and Cadillac’s The New Standard of The World are a great start, but Joel Ewanick, Mark Reuss, and many other top-level execs at GM have their work cut out for them going forward. This isn’t something that can be fixed overnight by hiring an ad agency. This — ladies and gents — is a deeply-rooted problem stemming from a missing (or neglected) core competency. And it needs to be fixed. Yesterday.

What do you think? Sound off your opinion in the comments below!

This article is part of the GM Authority Opinion Desk series, where you can see exactly what’s on the minds of the GM Authority crew.

GM Authority Executive Editor with a passion for business strategy and fast cars.

Subscribe to GM Authority

For around-the-clock GM news coverage

We'll send you one email per day with the latest GM news. It's totally free.

Comments

  1. I think that is a very good assessment!
    I’ll even add the Chevrolet Spark. We’re suppose to get a US production model here in early 2012. The Spark is a 4-Door hatchback “city” car that’s about the same size as the Mini Cooper.
    The Spark’s been out for about a couple of years in Europe, India, and several other countries. It’s suppose to get around 45mpg.
    So why has GM not advertised this car? Most people here have never heard of it. You would think with gas closing in on the $4 a gallon mark, GM would be puting the Spark up front & center. Instead the Chevrolet web site doesn’t even list it.
    I know GM has never really embraced small cars like they do with their large ones, and that’s too bad. I believe if marketed properly, the Spark could be a really successful small car here in the US. Especially if the price of gas continues to go up.

    Reply
  2. I would like to see GM to be more aggresive company and especially in Truck division. There is a lot that needs to be done to be competitive. I see some things got redone lately with HD’s but it’s not enough. Looks also plays an important factor along with interior, off-road capabilities including ground clearance and aproach angles, and larger wheel wells. I have seen quite a few Silverado’s with SFA, thats means that owner went out of his way to make that swap, how hard is it to offer both IFS and SFA to target all buyers? Duramax out performs others right now by it doesn’t mean that GM can relax, and please update gassers ASAP.

    Reply
    1. You’re absolutely right. And until then, the F-150 will continue outselling the Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra combined!

      I, for one, am very hopeful for the next generation trucks.

      Reply
  3. It does appear that they are slow to responding to the market. In my opinion I think the Cruze is a great vehicle and does not appeal outdated to me, GM could have released it in the US sooner what it was available in other countries for years. Another example would be not having something like Sync equivalent technologies in Fords. My least favorite is when we hear that an idea may come out and then it appears that we are left hanging. Not sure if this accurate, I guess I could say I got something out of their bailout indirectly by getting a free loaner car from the Chevy dealer while my car was getting repaired under remaining Powertrain Warranty as a 3rd owner.

    Reply
    1. I had the Cruze 1LT as a loaner car. Not sure if it had something to do with the break in period (loaner car had about 42 miles), I appear not to get substantially better fuel economy than my Impala.

      I’d agree that you would think the Spark would have greater attention. My feeling also is that most people are probably upside down on their current vehicle that they may not be able to get a car with better fuel economy. Though no excuse for not embracing small cars as much as their larger ones.

      Reply
      1. I think it was the break-in period that gave you the less-than-stellar fuel economy. I didn’t start getting decent MPGs until about 1,500 miles. Can’t wait for the diesel! 🙂

        Reply
    2. Well, the Cruze isn’t outdated… until you look at the competition. For example, both the new Elantra and Focus attain 40 MPG in REGULAR trim, while the Cruze needs to get all dressed up and fancy in the ECO. How about making all Cruze models achieve the 40MPG mark and do away with the ECO trim level altogether?

      And how about the lack of certain features that are all available on the new Focus and Elantra, such as:
      – push-button start
      – keyless entry
      – backup camera
      – touch screen
      – A2DP/bluetooth audio streaming
      – SYNC
      – a hatchback variant (vs. Focus)

      It’s true that the Cruze will get many of these updates for the 2012 model year… but it took almost three years to get it to the U.S.! You’d think these would be available from the get-go… See what I mean by outdated? It’s not bad… just a step and a half behind.

      PS: Chevy will soon have a Ford SYNC competitor called Chevrolet MyLink (not to be confused with OnStar MyLink). Yay!

      Alex
      Founder, GM Authority

      Reply
      1. I can see now what you mean and I definitely agree about it being step and half behind. I appreciate reading about your experience as to when you got decent fuel economy. I turned in the loaner Cruze with about 560 miles.

        Reply
        1. Should’ve put more in it 🙂

          PS: discovered a few other features the Cruze is missing:
          – Blind spot mirror
          – Side turn indicator (in mirror caps)
          – Heated mirrors
          – Capless fuel door

          All features the new Focus has.

          Reply
  4. I’m not so sure I agree entirely. The article is missing a very important point. The Focus is one of two, perhaps three, global vehicles that Ford sells in the US market. It chose to go a particular way with its introduction of the latest iteration. That is fine, but let us not forget that the Focus became a different vehicles in the US than what was sold in the rest of the world for a very long time too. We will see if that obtains once again. I don’t believe that you can’t sell a different version of the same chassis in Europe and in the US. And don’t be fooled. German versions of BMWs and Mercedes are VASTLY different from their US counterparts. Every car maker tailors cars to particular markets, be that tailoring in terms of a name or suspension settings. While I will agree that Sonic is a dumb ass name, period, there’s no confusing a Sonic for an Aveo unless both cars are sold in the same showroom at the same time. NOT gonna happen. I think the buying public should be given a bit more credit than that. I also don’t see what’s the excitement about Buick. GM is changing the image, the same way it changed the image of Cadillac. Five years ago nobody knew exactly what GM was trying to do with Cadillac and the nay-sayers were alive and kicking. Now the only kicking going on is the nay-sayers kicking themselves for not getting onboard long ago. Cadillac has become a relevant rival against ALL the European brands. Period. Who is Buick trying to compete against? The answer to that is not a blanket one. Buick doesn’t compete directly with a brand, per se, but models from various brands. LaCrosse competes against ES330/TL/MKS/S60 while Regal competes against TSX/MKZ/S40, if you get my meaning. Everybody has the solution to every problem in the world. But even the right solution needs to be given time to unfurl.

    Reply
    1. Richard — those are some good points. Overall, however, the problem I’m highlighting is more broad than what you’re referring to. For example, let’s take the Focus and the (very true) fact that it has been a different vehicle for the last two generations in Europe and North America. My argument stems from the fact that going forward, every single Ford vehicle will be global, except for a few exceptions (Taurus, F150/Expedition/EL/Econoline, Ranger, and perhaps Explorer). Everything else, including the Fiesta, Focus, C-MAX, S-MAX, Transit, next-gen Fusion/Mondeo, next-gen Escape/Kuga, and next-gen Edge will be global cars — just like the Focus.

      So while Mulally’s One Ford plan is just starting to take shape and show itself to the outside world, it’s been well on its way — and it will become reality before we know it. So while Ford is hard at work at globalizing, GM is doing quite the opposite with Chevy and Buick/Opel/Vauxhall. In five years, Ford will have completed its One Ford plan/transition because it started on that path almost three years ago… I’m not sure where GM will be at that point, since it looks like true globalization isn’t even on the minds of many GM’s execs.

      Secondly, are you sure that Cadillac is relevant against all European luxury brands? Have you talked to owners of new Caddys? Many that I’ve talked to so far tell me (in secret) that the only reason for them buying an SRX over an RX/X5/ML or a CTS over a 3 series/IS/C class is the substantially lower price. And where is Caddy’s flagship? I think we can both agree that the XTS (whenever it arrives) will NOT truly be competitive with the S class, 7 Series, LS and Infiniti’s upcoming full size flagship. As we all know, a true full size flagship requires a RWD platform. So while Cadillac has improved, it still hasn’t found itself — especially in Europe.

      And when it comes to Buick… well, this is more of a marketing thing. Let’s put it this way: a luxury brand needs to compete with other brands first. It then must compete with specific vehicles. This is the first rule of building a LUXURY brand — no matter the industry. The reasoning behind this is quite simple: when it comes to luxury, people buy brands. Sure, the product needs to meet their specifications and desires, but it must have the name and cachet as well!

      In my opinion, that’s the issue with your proposition of Buick going after specific “models” rather than an entire competitive “brand”. Buick vehicles may be great — but the brand needs to stand for something before the vehicles are discovered. And when you have a hodge-podge of cars that are all over the map (like Buick kind of does today), that all-important brand begins to suffer. There’s a reason, for example, that Lexus doesn’t make dump trucks and why BMW doesn’t make public busses. (Benz, however, does make trucks and commercial vans, but that’s a different topic.) But BMW does have a line of performance motor bikes — which perfectly complements its established image in the performance luxury auto arena. As such, Buick needs a brand identity first. It needs to decide where it stands — performance luxury (BMW, Audi, Infinit, etc.) or pure (soft) luxury (Lexus/Lincoln). And from there, it needs to go global. A global presence is one of the pre-requisites for being recognized as a true luxury marquee. That’s why Lexus went global, rather than continuing to sell Lexus products as Toyotas outside the U.S./Canada; and that’s why Acura and Infiniti have been looking for the right opportunity to do the same.

      PS: The S60 doesn’t compete in the midsize segment against LaCrosse/ES350, TL… it’s a compact luxury vehicle that’s much more in line with 3 series, C Class, IS, A4, TSX, etc. And the S40 — which is going away, by the way — is way too small to be compared to the Regal (a midsize vehicle) and the MKZ… if anything, I’d categorize as follows:
      — ES350, LaCrosse, MKZ, (maybe even the TL, since it’s a lot more sporty than the aforementioned vehicles)
      — TSX/S60/3 series/C Class/A4/Lexus IS

      The Regal should belong in the first class due its size… and it can be there price-wise as well; but Buick stupidly has the LaCrosse priced too far down-market for that to occur.

      At the end of the day, the point is that many compromises are made when the Epsilon II architecture is made for Buick (supposedly a luxury brand), Opel/Vauxhall (as discussed in the article, I’m not sure where they fit), and Chevy (next-gen Malibu). These compromises simply can’t exist if Buick is to be a player in the luxury space.

      Alex
      Founder, GM Authority

      Reply
  5. Yes it’s sad to see that F series outsell Chevrolet and GMC (combined) for a 2nd year now, but F series include F-150, 250, 350, 450, and 550. Ford tries really hard to keep that crown and they succeed.

    Reply
    1. Right! No reason why Chevy can’t do the same with Silverado while combining sales of the Silverado 1500, 2500, 3500, and the upcoming medium-duty trucks for one big Silverado number…

      Reply
  6. This is why GM will always be behind Ford. They coulda used their wide variety of bankrupt brands for some good and clear positioning. Instead, what we see is good ol’ craptastic GM all over again. Buy a Ford and call it a day.

    ~ FordTang

    Reply
    1. Looks like we’ve got ourselves a (Gasp!) Ford troll! Welcome FordTang… enjoy your lovely blue oval for breakfast much? How about that lovely piece of junk called the Ranger?

      Reply
      1. Enjoyed both thoroughly. Did you enjoy the Aveo for lunch? I hear baked cardboard is tasty! Now that Ford finally (and deservedly) outsells the crippled old general, there’s no return. Hey, everyone needs to retire at some point. The general should just do us all a favor and go away now… before he gets Alzheimer’s or something else…

        ~ FordTang

        Reply
      2. Hey… don’t hate on the Ranger.

        Reply
        1. The last-gen ranger… it’s a good but old car. Worse than Colorado/Canyon combo. And don’t instigate him! 🙂

          Reply
  7. Looks like all the ford fans are same (dumb). GM is an American company just like ford, America could of did a lot better financially if we wouldn’t ship all those jobs over seas. If GM was to shut it’s doors, most of its customers wouldn’t just automatically switch to ford, leaving a huge oppertunity to foreign auto makers, means less jobs here, it would be another great depression in US.

    Reply
  8. I’ve owned both, Ranger and Colorado. Colorado was a better truck but felt underpowered, tends to downshifting on small hills. Colorado should of had a 3.6 v6 instead of that 5 banger.

    Reply
    1. You noticed that too, huh? The downshifts kill that truck — all due to the anemic 5. Isn’t that engine almost 2 decades old anyway? Even the (still anemic) 3 liter LF1 would have been better in that truck. And a better interior.

      Reply
  9. 2011 GM’s brands: Baojun, Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, GMC, Daewoo,
    Holden, Isuzu, Jiefang, Opel, Vauxhall, and Wuling.

    Not only is it a mouth full but a hand full for GM. No where else is it more apparent than on the Showroom floor where customer satisfaction and/or dissatisfaction is most apparent. The Cruze got off to a slow start but is gaining momentum & the quality of the Chevy product is at an all time high. Just when you mention the global stutter starts of a mix of products along comes the 2012/13 Malibu and the plans for it “In keeping with G.M.’s global ambitions, the Malibu will be sold in nearly 100 countries on six continents and will be built in China and the United States”.
    The General needs to get a handle on it’s “Social Media” & turn the conversations into conversions.
    Gordy
    @WallyEdgarChevy & @TweetMyChevys

    Reply
  10. If GM was to have a more global brand, they need to replace Vauxhall with Opel (same cars, two different companies). Replacing Holden would be a disaster for GM in Oceania. They could bring Chevrolet to Oceania but the Holden brand is one of the strongest in the WORLD. Fans are loyal to Holden, not GM. Pontiac fans are mostly sticking with GM but if Holden goes, so will their fans. I think GM should be Chevy, Holden, Opel and Cadillac. Sell Buicks and GMC under Chevrolet. Rather than sell Chevys under Holden in Oceania, GM should invest in Holden and make it a RWD specialist company or something.

    Reply

Leave a comment

Cancel