While most news surrounding CEOs and the automotive industry currently revolves around now-ex Ford CEO Mark Fields’ ousting, it’s an opposite picture at General Motors.
New data from Owler places GM CEO Mary Barra at number four and number five on the automotive industry’s most liked CEOs. Owler combs through thousands of data points and reviews from employees and site users to create its ranking. Barra placed fourth with regards to overseeing the Chevrolet brand and fifth with regards to GM as a whole.
Of the CEOs leading an actual automaker—the list also includes suppliers and other auto industry leaders—Barra ranks second, just behind Volvo CEO Håkan Samuelsson, who ranked first overall. Fiat Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne ranks 11th and former Ford CEO Mark Fields ranks 12th.
Unsurprisingly, leaders from Volkswagen rounded out the bottom of the list.
Barra has been busy transforming GM from a global giant to a leaner—hopefully more profitable—automaker. She has sold off Opel and Vauxhall to PSA Groupe, marking an exit from Europe; she oversaw the decision to end manufacturing in Australia; her stamp of approval is on the decision to cease selling cars in India and exit from South Africa entirely.
They are potentially unpopular decisions now, but they could make for strong, future profits with a focus on North America, China and South America.
Comments
You’ve got to be kidding us, right ?
Is it 1st April already?
LMAO!
The worst GM CEO list should read:
1. Mary Barra
2. Roger B Smith
3. Harlow Curtis
I don’t know what bunch of brain dead morons voted in this “Auto Industry’s Most Liked Executives” but they obviously did not have any relevant knowledge of the auto industry.
Why would she be the worst? Because GM is actually doing well, making money, making good products and people are buying them even though the discounts are not massive like Ford and FCA?
Because she is a women? And some misogenistic A-holes would not accept any women in a position of power. GM has never had better products.
Sean is infatuated with her. Don’t expect logic or real facts.
Holden is a branch of U.S. automaker GM.
Holden wasn’t originally a part of GM. It dates back to the mid 1800’s and has historical and cultural significance to Australians which we are proud of.
Holden became a subsidiary of GM from the 1930’s.
Mary Berra is the best thing to happen at GM since Jack Smith. No more politics and fixing your buddies with the big jobs.Hope she stays at least until she accomplishes her goals. What a breath of fresh air she has become.
A retired multi GM dealer
Learn to spell.
But you are right because she ignored the haters and is working with President Trump, so she is doing something right.
She’s a little too friendly with KKKheeto, but is otherwise a good Josephine.
Oh look. A sockpuppet parade! I’m so devastated. And I’m crying.
Where’s the link to the complete list?
Re-read the article. Read it. Think and click on the link.
Mary Barra will go down in GM history as having taken the right approach with General Motors. However, Mary needs to continue her focus on just two brands, those brands of course being Chevrolet and Cadillac.
Brand names starting with Holden but also including Buick, Vauxhall and others need to be progressively retired to history. These brands need to go the same way as Oldsmobile and Pontiac.
GM needs to continue moving towards the day that worldwide it sells just Chevrolet to the mass market and Cadillac to the high end market. In doing this it will finally even the playing field with brands such as Ford, Chrysler, Volkswagen and BMW.
No matter what GM-Holden in Australia want to believe, the Holden brand after the last REAL Holden leaves the South Australian assembly line in just a few months from now will be nothing more than a badge and an expensive badge for the parent company to justify given the very small Australian market.
The obvious and simple fix is to convert Australia’s ‘Holden dealers’ into International GM dealers or alternatively Cadillac / Chevrolet dealers. Gone are the days when individual countries should market their own brands. Today’s automobile buyers have immediate access to the worldewide showroom and Internationally known branding such as Mercedes Benz, BMW and Volkswagen attract attention.
Added to this, Australian buyers will not be fooled by GM-Holden’s claim that simply replacing another brand name badge with a Holden badge makes that cart unique to Australia. If this is attempted, then the practise of replacing ‘Holden’ badges with Chevrolet’ badges will only become more and more common.
The Worldwide Future for General Motors is CLEARLY based on selling Chevrolet and Cadillac firstly the American market but then to the world market.
Don’t worry about Vauxhall. Being just the name for Opel in a single country, it will pass together with Opel itself by the end of this year to PSA, unless something completely unexpected happens inbetween.
Mary has done well in some very trying times. If all the issues she faced happened under any of the leaders of the last 40 years under the same conditions GM would not be here.
The truth is considering all GM has been through they are doing well with stock worth $30 while others like Ford struggle at $11 a share.
The ignition thing would have killed Ford.
Right now all automakers are struggling. The long term goal is to cut spending, continue to fund new technology and development. All while increasing profitability of each unit sold. In the future automakers have to make more per unit as they will sell less units in the future.
Growing many overseas markets is near impossible right now unless you are already established. Even then many struggle in the present state of Europe.
The way cars are designed, built and sold has to change. Just the same auto makers have to change how the do buisness as the market is only going to get tougher to operate in. To make it auto makers have to be very efficient in how they go things.
Mary, Dan and Mark have been the right people at the right time.
As for GMs future Buick will be fine here as they are leveraged so heavy in China that American Sales are add on’s.
Emotionally seeing Opel go is as sad as losing Pontiac. But with the changes and needed efficiency that is needed it had to go. At least selling them brought income vs just shutting them down.
Holden really could have gone but sat least GM was willing to rebadge their product and start to engineer the product to go RHD.
GM could no longer operate as they used to as it nearly killed them as they did not adapt to current markets soon enough.
I know some of you get emotional about this but it really was a change or die case. Emotionally killing off brands is painful but it was the right and smart thing to do.
I really can see many have no clue how expensive development cost are today. The big clue is the GM Ford transmission deal that should make it clear yonyou how high cost are anymore. I would have expected Iran an America to work together before Fird and GM did. I am not sure how extreme it has to get before some catch on.
GM is now just getting to the post bail out platforms and models and with time and investment they should see continued strong long term profits. Few if any will post large sales gains moving ahead.
Stock will remain stable and could grow if the investment in technology continues and if it pays off.
Things like the aluminum/steel welding is going to provide a good return as others adapt to it to save weight.
Also look for GM to work with others on joint projects where GM will do most of the work and the partner funds most of the project like GM does on the transmission programs.
I find it odd as those that are blog CEO’s hate Mary while most people in the industry and in buisness really admire her. I guess that is why the blog CEO’s are talking auto industry and not really working in it.
The closer I watch, the more I believe she will make GM, and more specifically the Chevrolet & Cadillac sub brands, profitable.
But, and there is a yuuuge BUT; at the expense or detriment (and probably death) of all those other GM sub-brands – Holden, Buick, GMC et all.
If the sub brands die, what replaces them? Chevrolet and Cadillac – both of which have no real market presence to speak of in Australasia (Aus/NZ). What do GM do? Completely pull out of two ‘first world markets’, with 29 million potential first world income customers?, or push the Chev/Caddie brands into these markets with a truck-load (multi-10s of millions) of marketing money to establish some credible brand image for Chev & Caddie?
GM’s loss really (and literally). Short term view, for short term gain.
Meanwhile European and Japanese brands are committed to a long term view, with established & profitable market share in almost every market they enter. They are systematic, persistent and far-sighted in their strategies.
There is no way Mary Barra is doing any good for GM from a long term, global perspective. GM will end up a “respectable” North American manufacturer, snapped up by a bigger, more progressive European or Japanese (possibly Chinese) manufacturer.
Consider this:
Toyota is the largest auto company in the world with a market cap 3 X that of GM and they only have 2 divisions.
Isn’t that because they make reasonably priced, reliable vehicles with low maintenance costs, and they want to portray that in a unified brand?
(I’m ignoring the Lexus division because they are just Toyotas “in drag”).
I believe GM is on their way to be a privately owned company again to avoid a hostile takeover situation. The bread crumbs are their.
Gm is also extremely profitable right now. Their biggest problem is too many divisions, but I don’t see how they can get rid of any of them as the ones that seem like they could lose are doing very well. If anything, dump Cadillac and remove the glass ceiling at Buick to let them go very slightly up market.
Last I read Toyota’s profits were down 20%
Yes down to 13.81 B vs GM 9.43 in 2016.
“If anything, dump Cadillac and remove the glass ceiling at Buick”
I know what you mean but NEVER dump Cadillac. I’d rather eliminate dumb@$$ Avenir. What braintrust came up with idea of lessening a Buick by offering non-Avenir Buicks? WTflyingF?!?
Cadillac should be Buick’s ‘Avenir’. Or really Buick should be a base Cadillac. (Which it sort of is.) I’m saying Buicks and Cadillacs should have some overlap and live on the same lots.
That would be interesting.
I think GM and Ford will merge in the next recession to be able to face the onslaught of Asian/Chinese brands who will enter the market around 2020. Now that the Western brands have created their future competitors, the Chinese will attack them on their own market. This is so predictable.
(I wouldn’t want to be in the same room as hardcore Ford and GM fans saying that. Lol)
A merger is a very distinct possibility (nationalist sentiment being what it is in the US at the moment) – sometime in the future. Not sure about your timeline though.
I think the trigger will be when you start to see the Chinese corporates pulling out of their JVs with foreign automakers to “go it alone”. Until then, they are “learning” the industry from their more skilled partners (mentors).
I agree. The JV will be in place as long as the Western company continues to bring something to the table. When the student is no longer getting benefits, it’s game over. What they usually do is form another JV with another Chinese partner and then compete with the foreign company as they did with Bombardier in the train sector.
He used the word PIGgressive.
???
“marketing money to establish some credible brand image for Chev & Caddie”
Last time I checked neither Chevy or Caddie has a credible brand image in America. Buick is starting to have one and GMC is still a question mark.
Branding isn’t the problem. It’s the cars. I believe Barra is turning that around but making GM cars preferable to Asian cars is, as you say, a long haul proposition.
The briefness of a blog often precludes full explanation.
So, what I meant by “credible” in this context was “to compete with the brand marketing of the swaithe of other brands already well positioned and established in this market”, ie. to get cut through. Neither Chev or Cadillac are marketed in Aussie/NZ. If anything GM gets more market ‘cut through’ even though there is no marketing to back it up.
It was not intended as a reference to product reliability (in other markets), product range (in other markets) or product depth (in other markets).
Fair enough.
She is transforming GM as a regional company…