General Motors – Where Were the Truth-Tellers?
[by Bruce Hennes]
According to this week’s New York Times, ”It was nearly five years ago that any doubts were laid to rest among engineers at General Motors about a dangerous and faulty ignition switch. At a meeting on May 15, 2009, they learned that data in the black boxes of Chevrolet Cobalts confirmed a potentially fatal defect existed in hundreds of thousands of cars.”
Over the next five years, the number of people who knew about the continuing problems grew to include employees from sales and marketing, manufacturing and parts, field representatives and public relations. Also in the loop were scores of inside attorneys and outside counsel.
Why did no one stand up and say stop?
We get it. Despite the Damage Control Playbook mantra (“tell the truth, tell it all and tell it first”) sometimes the truth is elusive. Facts are always colored by context and often surrounded with indecision. Factor in peer pressure and self-survival, telling the truth can be murky, elusive and daunting.
That said, every organization needs a Truth Teller — someone who knows when it’s time to draw the line in the sand. Someone who knows when to put it on the line. Someone who is willing to take a stand, a personal risk. Someone who can tell truth to power.
There were likely hundreds who knew that people driving GM cars were dying. From all news reports, the evidence was incontrovertible. There were no shades of gray and there were plenty of case studies GM could have looked to for guidance. Need a few examples? How about Firestone and their exploding tires, Jerry Sandusky and Penn State, Enron and Lehman Brothers. History is replete with examples of organizations where wrongdoing was without doubt and pervasive – and no one told truth to power.
As crisis communications specialists, we are often asked to provide words and messages intended to make a crisis or reputational issue better, to make it shorter – or to make it go away.
But the truth of the matter is that crisis situations usually aren’t remedied with words. They’re remedied with actions. GM’s new CEO, Mary Barra, who apparently was totally unaware of the situation prior to her recent appointment, is off to the right start by offering apology, fixes and investigations.
It’s too late for Mary Barra to tell it first, but she can still tell the truth and tell it all. We hope that after the law suits are adjudicated…after a few individuals are fired…after hundreds of millions of dollars are paid in damages and putative fines and as GM strives to rebuild trust…we hope Ms. Barra knows that in the end, GM will ultimately not be judged as much by what happened, but what her management team did after it found out it happened.
For more about the GM ignition recall, we recommend the following articles:
General Motors Misled Grieving Families on a Lethal Flaw
New York Times
GM’s Crisis – Avoidable, and Then Inevitable
The Holmes Report
Recall at GM Is Early Trial for New Chief
New York Times
The Crisis Communications Playbook: What GM’s Mary Barra (and Every Leader) Needs to Know
Harvard Business Review
GM Uses Social Media to Manage Customers and Its Reputation
New York Times
History Gives Other Cases of GM’s Behavior
New York Times