Akerson Demands GM Innovation to Blunt Tesla Threat

[igotzzoom]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...vation-to-guard-against-musk-effect-cars.html

"(Akerson) thinks Tesla could be a big disrupter if we're not careful," Steve Girsky, GM vice chairman, said last week during an interview at Bloomberg headquarters in New York. "History is littered with big companies that ignored innovation that was coming their way because you didn’t know where you could be disrupted."
​

 

[davecolene0606]

What is quite apparent is that he still doesn't get it

"While Akerson and Girsky are encouraging more risk-taking, the CEO is demanding that R&D be concentrated on ideas that car-buyers will want and pay for."

Innovations don't come from a customer survey it comes from introducing something everyone didn't even know they needed, The Model S and IPhone come to mind. He is demonstrably short sighted if he thinks about this as some sort of build what they ask for.

Tesla is disruptive because they did what GM marketers said "the consumer did not want".

He really should worry about Tesla.

 

[brianman]

"(Akerson) thinks Tesla could be a big disrupter if we're not careful,"

"Could be"?

Dear Mr. Akerson, here's the wall with the writing on it:

 

[GasDoc]

What is quite apparent is that he still doesn't get it

"While Akerson and Girsky are encouraging more risk-taking, the CEO is demanding that R&D be concentrated on ideas that car-buyers will want and pay for."
.

I forget the exact quote but the gist of it is that if you asked people what they wanted in terms of transportation before the car was invented, they would have told you "A faster horse that eats and drinks less".

 

[dsm363]

I forget the exact quote but the gist of it is that if you asked people what they wanted in terms of transportation before the car was invented, they would have told you "A faster horse that eats and drinks less".

Looks like the quote is attributed to Henry Ford but not sure if he actually said it:

"If I’d asked people what they wanted, they’d have asked for a faster horse.” Henry Ford

Blog: Three old chestnuts, cracked | Foolproof

 

[Grendal]

My comment on the article at ABG:

One year from now:

Mr Akerson, we have the results of our Tesla study. We managed to come in under budget for the study at $965K instead of the million you allotted. I'm very proud of that success.

Okay. The results of our findings are that Tesla has created an all electric car that consumers have asked for. It has excellent performance with a 0-60 of 4.0 seconds. The skateboard battery pack means that the center of gravity is about the same as our Corvette. So it handles unbelievably well. We created a skateboard propulsion system back in 2001 but never developed it beyond the experimental phase. The car also has a very low Cd. Our Ultralite concept we developed in 1992 had a low Cd. We never developed that car either. It had a lot of forward thinking ideas that were never developed either. The Tesla Model S has a lot of exciting new ideas that they implemented immediately and they continue to update and upgrade the car on the fly.

Akerson: How much do they charge for that?

Uh. Nothing, sir. Tesla considers it part of the ownership. Their philosophy seems to be to listen to their customers and give them what they want.

Akerson: They are making us look bad.

From what we researched, that wasn't their point. It was simply to make the buying experience the best it can possibly be. As part of the study we discovered that our customers are unhappy with our system for buying a car.


I could have gone on but I hoped the point was made....

 

[Doug_G]

What is quite apparent is that he still doesn't get it

"While Akerson and Girsky are encouraging more risk-taking, the CEO is demanding that R&D be concentrated on ideas that car-buyers will want and pay for."

Innovations don't come from a customer survey it comes from introducing something everyone didn't even know they needed, The Model S and IPhone come to mind. He is demonstrably short sighted if he thinks about this as some sort of build what they ask for.

Tesla is disruptive because they did what GM marketers said "the consumer did not want".

He really should worry about Tesla.

This. They don't even understand the nature of disruptive innovations - that their customers will tell them they don't want the products. Unless they've really understood that they want a Tesla, and why.

 

[Blurry_Eyed]

I could see this as a plot line for a good episode of 'The Office'!

 

[lorih]

Nice!

 

[artsci]

The whole problem with the conventional auto industry is that it's based on a focus group marketing mentality. If the Model S were evaluated in focus groups Tesla would have concluded that nobody wanted it.

It's apparent that Akerson is still caught in that trap.

 

[richkae]

14 million new passenger vehicles are sold in the US each year.
15000 Teslas is just about 0.1%
Thats all they need to succeed. That's a niche way too small for a focus group to even notice.
They can grow from there.

 

[herbvdh]

Akerson's mistake is a group to study Tesla. He should tell his R & D team to design competition to Tesla. Let me see we need 1) Good batteries. 2) A charger 3) A controller and 4) a motor. Now Akerson How hard is that??? It is not rocket science either!!! This was part of a discussion in my office today. I have a PhD. in engineering maybe GM needs me. Sorry GM too late.

 

[evme]

One year from now:

Akerson: So what is the results of the study?

Employee: Ah, sir. The entire team quit and moved to Tesla. They brought in their resignations the day they took a test ride sir.

Akerson: Hmm....set up another study team...

~Another year later~

Akerson: So what is the results of the study?

Employee: Ah, sir. The entire team quit and moved to Tesla. They brought in their resignations the day they took a test ride sir.

Akerson: What in the world is going on? I am going to go and see for myself.

~one month later~

Executive: Where is Mr Akerson? I have some papers for him to sign.

Employee: Ah, sir. The Mr Akerson quit and moved to Tesla. He brought in his resignations the day he took a test ride sir.

The whole problem with the conventional auto industry is that it's based on a focus group marketing mentality. If the Model S were evaluated in focus groups Tesla would have concluded that nobody wanted it.

It's apparent that Akerson is still caught in that trap.

Actually, maybe a focus group is what they need. But in a different format. They need to take a GM car and cover it up and a Tesla and cover it up. And have people take a test ride. Then tell them both are new models made by GM and which one they want GM to make. The answer would then be clear.

 

[brianman]

Actually, maybe a focus group is what they need. But in a different format. They need to take a GM car and cover it up and a Tesla and cover it up. And have people take a test ride. Then tell them both are new models made by GM and which one they want GM to make. The answer would then be clear.

Applying the "Pepsi Challenge" will just lock in more Model S reservations.

 

[elecblue]

"Could be"?

Dear Mr. Akerson, here's the wall with the writing on it:

View attachment 26216

Classic!

 

[evme]

Applying the "Pepsi Challenge" will just lock in more Model S reservations.

That is why I said to cover up the car and tell them that its also a GM car. If they didn't cover it up, then yes that would just increase the Model S reservations.

 

[Grendal]

Akerson's mistake is a group to study Tesla. He should tell his R & D team to design competition to Tesla. Let me see we need 1) Good batteries. 2) A charger 3) A controller and 4) a motor. Now Akerson How hard is that??? It is not rocket science either!!! This was part of a discussion in my office today. I have a PhD. in engineering maybe GM needs me. Sorry GM too late.

As I posted in my playful comment, GM (and the other major manufacturers as well) has revolutionary designs and innovations. They just never implement them because they are too far from the current designs. How often do you see a very cool new design on the cover of a car magazine for a show car that makes the show circuit then is never seen again? That happens constantly. Tesla works in reverse. If there is a need then Tesla makes it happen. If it's a good idea then it is put into the car.

 

[Morristhecat]

This reminds me of the Volt. When the concept car came out, it was a sexy all electric car that every magazine showcased. At the auto show, crowds were packed around it and everyone wanted one. I remember specifically that I was going to get one when they come out.

Flash forward a few years and the production Volt is shown. Woah, they put a gas engine in it now? Huh, it isn't sexy any more and looks like every other cars lines. It only has a small battery now??? I no longer wanted this car. While it is still progress, it was still a big fail compared to what they had. (No offence to the Volt owners here)

They had the formula in the concept, and GM's marketing gurus changed the formula from sexy to bleh. So typical.

Meanwhile Tesla puts out a sexy all electric concept, and that is exactly what their production car became. They offered sexy, and gave sexy. They got the formula and kept it. People want it.

The formula is make it sexy. Make it better than anything else. Make it with the better material than currently avilable. Make it easy. Go out of the box. Go out of your comfort zone. To my knowledge only Apple and Tesla get it. GM, Chrysler, Ford not. I think BMW might be figuring it out soon.

 

[brianman]

The formula is make it sexy. Make it better than anything else. Make it with the better material than currently avilable. Make it easy. Go out of the box. Go out of your comfort zone.

... and actually make that for customers. Not some watered down POS that nobody wants.

 

[scottf200]

This reminds me of the Volt. When the concept car came out, it was a sexy all electric car that every magazine showcased. At the auto show, crowds were packed around it and everyone wanted one. I remember specifically that I was going to get one when they come out.

Flash forward a few years and the production Volt is shown. Woah, they put a gas engine in it now? Huh, it isn't sexy any more and looks like every other cars lines. It only has a small battery now??? I no longer wanted this car. While it is still progress, it was still a big fail compared to what they had. (No offence to the Volt owners here)

Disclosure: I have a deposit on a Model X. (I'm still stunned on how much Tesla is doing software updates.)

So at one point your are saying the Volt concept was going to be a battery only BEV car? I don't recall ever hearing that.

Of course, I was a little late to the Volt party. Still I bought one before they were available in my state. Flew to NY and drove it back to IL (charging at a B&B on the two day trip). 23,000 electric on miles (30K total) and 2.5 yrs later the car is still very impressive!! Been using it on some road trips this past year.

Also GM is making good on the concept with the ELR. I was at a stoplight just this very morning being questioned by a corvette driver about the Volt. He planned on getting the ELR.

Then there is the Spark EV which it appears they put a LOT of R&D money in the motors (perm and induct).
This R&D can be used for other cars obviously. They are not sitting still.

http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2011/Oct/1026_spark_elec_mtr.html

--