A set of previously confidential training documents from General Motors released this week, which warned engineers from using certain descriptive words when identifying product risks, reveal a dangerous culture within the company, U.S. officials say.
According to Reuters, the training documents were used during a technical learning conference in 2008. They give engineers words to use in place of other words which could be potentially more damning and paint the issue in a darker light. For example, the slides tell engineers to use “does not perform to design” instead of words like “defect” or “problem.”
GM is currently under investigation from multiple organizations, including the U.S. Justice Department, who are looking to find out why it took the automaker more than a decade to recall cars with certain ignition switches which it knew were faulty. The flaw has been linked to 13 deaths and resulted in the recall of more than 2.6 million small cars.
One of the documents included multiple “judgement words” and phrases which GM strongly advised engineers against using, such as “deathtrap,” “rolling sarcophagus,” “Hindenberg” and the somewhat humorous “Corvair-like.” The documents show how the company may have been nervous about engineer’s reports being publicized by the media in the wake of a recall.
“GM must rethink the corporate philosophy reflected in the documents we reviewed,” David Friedman, head of the NHTSA, said Friday.
A statement from GM spokesman Greg Martin said the company’s culture and this way of doing business was left behind when the Old GM departed, and cited it’s new safety program as evidence.
“Today’s GM encourages employees to discuss safety issues, which is reinforced through GM’s recently announced Speak Up for Safety Program,” he said.
Comments
Oh please!
This is just getting down right silly.
First off this is nothing new or different than what any other company would want or expect from an Engineer. In the world today your words can be used against you and taken out of context by an lawyer in any case taken to court whether legitimate or not.
This is no different than the old sales training line to say inexpensive and not cheap when describing a product.
Now I would hope GM has engineers smart enough to not say “deathtrap,” “rolling sarcophagus,” “Hindenberg” and the somewhat humorous “Corvair-like.” in the first place.
It is a dangerous world to be a company anymore. Between the lack of tort reform and the lack of people taking responsibility for their own actions you can damn well be taken to court for just about anything anymore. Even if you win it will cost you big money you will never get back. All companies are not angels either but in some cases they can not be if they want to keep in business.
If this is the worst thing they can find that GM has in any file then the NHTSA is hurting for any smoking gun.
The practice of not calling things what they are to avoid the truth is nothing new:
Not using “judgement” words is very appropriate – if facts have been determined, then it’s OK to use words that describe the results of the test, but judgement words are just that – opinions based on a judgement. The media gets hold of those haphazard words and blows them into fact. I don’t see any problem with having a code of conduct for communications.
If anyone took any marketing or business classes in Collage they would know this is one thing they teach there.
The use of words and language in a company any company is very Important.
Wow, the ridiculousness continues. Let’s see, while the government is at it, they might as well study other companies as well, and not just automotive companies. I wonder how many companies they can fine, then spend the money uselessly? Perhaps maybe they can find a case to where GE, could have manufactured an oven that exploded. I mean who knows? Maybe engineers used the words spark instead of violent explosion. Maybe those ovens could have been manufactured in the 70’s, and they still haven’t recalled them or settled any lawsuits to this day. Don’t take any of that for fact though, because I certainly do not know if such a case exists. I’m sure no one would know, but it would be interesting to find out. Maybe the media has details in their numerous databases. Seriously, this stuff occurred, fix the issues, like what GM is doing, and let’s move on.
It is not like the government never does this.
They Never say you are raising taxes you are mealy Enhancing budget revenues.
It is called the art of Able Debating, but I call it Bullshitting. They all do it.
The best one is “What Does it Matter”? Imagine if Mary Barra had used that one on the ignition issue.
The issue here is that certain people within the company thought it healthier for engineers to not be frank with what they’re experiencing, and that these are supposed to be internal discussions, and not words and phrases that were attempted to be conveyed to the general public. GM employees couldn’t be straight with each other, and that’s a problem. It’s also laughable to think that this culture suddenly evaporated into thin air after the summer of 2009. GM’s done a lot of work shaking up its executive culture, perhaps. But breaking the rituals of middle management is a much bigger undertaking.
The culture from the top to the bottom is being looked at and repaired. There were issues in the whole system.
It is not just the things the executives messes up but it was also retraining those under them to take the initiative and do what they know is right and not have to wait for 3 levels of management to come to them and tell them it was right.
You want a real hoot just read up on what Lutz thinks about Product Planners. Not just at GM but even at Ford and Chrysler. Or the Vehicle Line Executives.
The worst group at GM was the APEX group. It is on page 89 in his book and it is more insane than anything you could imagine at GM.
It is logical, necessary, intelligent, and eminently proper that inflammatory rhetoric be prohibited in corporate communications of all types. It is also totally correct, indeed, that this position be communicated, in formal, written form, to all employees. It is further proper that violation of this policy results in disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment. It is not necessary to use inflammatory words to make a strong expression of concern. It is, however, both necessary and proper to express strong concern whenever the situation so requires; in such cases, it is the responsibility of management to inform all applicable parties, especially corporate legal staff, of the particulars involved.
Besides It is just proof with like any other profession that people can be smart enough to be an engineer but not always smart enough to be professional in their office conversations.