I posted some comments to GM’s “FastLane Blog” and have an additional post script I debated about including directly on the GM site. So I’m putting it here where serious people may find it through the links I left there.

Some feedback comments by concerned posters included requesting a big PR stunt.

For something completely different.. Lutz & crew could go through the GM employee lease program to prove the quality mission and will save some cash in the process. This will be unpopular internally while instructive externally and invaluable to the consumer needing a reason to believe in GM again.

New “old” Program: Every middle manager gets a 5 year old GM vehicle, every executive gets a couple of 10 year old GM vehicles, while a couple at the top might be provided some 15 year old vehicles (in quantities equivalent to their current allocations). Sure, you could put mileage numbers around those profiles too. Do this until GM is profitable and has increasing market share (a new incentive program). No one shows up at work with any new cars!

These vehicles would be purchased at used auto auctions or from classifieds, and need to be a representative random population of vehicles with no “prep work” allowed (readers might be surprised, or not, to learn executives often get new vehicles that were tweaked so the big boys don’t get any initial quality surprises and the plants etc don’t get more work and headaches from their bosses), and no classic cars either. This will also soak up the secondary used car market (increasing sales value of new vehicles) - which is a major contributor to poor resale values/lease rates/etc.

Any problems must be fixed in person at a GM dealer (everyone feels the same pain). No one can pass off quality problems - quality teams need to make sure the trends seen there are fixed for the new vehicles (prove that the latest spark plug wires don’t soak up salt and moisture to strand someone’s wife late at night). Track and comment on the results (what problems, how long to fix, can they find repair parts, how many missed meetings, number of break-downs on the road to Aspen, etc).

Then GM will be able to convince Consumers Reports to re-evaluate their used car rankings. GM would have a fleet of thousands to refute CR’s data (which is survey response driven and so has some natural statistical quirks). GM managers will see how engineering and purchasing decisions can improve or worsen extended vehicle life expectancies. They will have walked the mile in an average consumers’ shoes and only then will the consumers believe them.

Certainly, lots of risk, and lots of details that need to be fleshed out too (I can hear the crackle of flames now). But maybe it could work.

Will anyone be so bold to try it?