Behind the J.D. Power & Associates Initial Quality Study
By Jamie Hresko
GM Vice President, Quality
2008 Chevrolet Malibu
There are many gate-checks, so to speak, here at GM when it comes to quality. However, the ones that matter most to you, the customer, the driver, are the external measures that tell you if we’re all wet or if we’re running hard and clean. Today, J.D. Power & Associates announced its Initial Quality Survey results. I won’t re-iterate the content of the press release.
I will take the opportunity to point out that J.D. Power is not only a third party source, but the data comes from vehicle owners - the people who drive the cars day in and day out. Essentially, they’re sharing their hindsight. Confirming they made a great purchase or admitting that they were oversold. You can read the release for yourself, here.
Now, I do want to share with you the story behind the numbers. As I mentioned in my last post, there is far more to the quality story than initial quality. However, today is about initial quality …
2008 Chevrolet Silverado
We’re very excited to lead the ultra-competitive mid-size car segment, large pickup segment and the large car segment with the all-new Chevrolet Malibu, the Chevrolet Silverado LD and the Pontiac Grand Prix. Additionally, we’re also excited for the Fairfax Assembly Center and its Bronze Plant Quality Award win. This award represents great commitment and hard work by the team in Kansas. In the case of the Chevrolet Silverado and Pontiac Grand Prix, these are two solid products that are serving their brands well.
2008 Pontiac Grand Prix
As a parent, I never favor one kid over another - although my kids would probably disagree. However, I’d like to focus a little bit here on our new kid the Chevy Malibu. The Malibu’s win is significant. Looking at the industry, it’s true that the quality of new vehicle launches is improving. However, the quality of the new Malibu is exceptional - as evidenced by the distinction of being named a J.D. Power midsize car segment winner. This is big. It’s big because in its first year, the Chevrolet Malibu was right … straight out of the gate. So, what does this really mean? It means we are moving in the right direction. We know what to do, how to do it. Now, we need to apply it to vehicles. And we are …
In 2007, quite embarrassingly, none of our brands ranked above industry average. This year, however, Chevrolet, Cadillac, Pontiac and Buick - which represent 82 percent of the cars and trucks we sell — ranked above industry average. If you ask me, that’s pretty darn good! Is it enough? Is any of this enough? No, of course not. But it’s good progress. I’ll take it and keep forging ahead. Wouldn’t you?
Jamie Hresko, will hold a chat on GMnext.com today from 3:00 to 4:00 p.m. to discuss GM results in the J.D. Power & Associates Initial Quality Study.
- Posted in Cars & Trucks
gtjeff
“In the case of the Chevrolet Silverado and Pontiac Grand Prix, these are two solid products that are serving their brands well.”
Why then is the Grand Prix being cancelled?
The quality of your vehicles is much improved over the last ten years, now at least on par with the import brands, in some cases exceeding them. Why not incorporate this theme more in your advertising? GM is like a prize fighter with one glove behind its back. Too much advertising money is being wasted advertising the unnecessary renames.
Where you need to improve is on strategic decision making. Whose short sighted decision was it to discontinue these JD Power award winners: LeSabre, Century and Grand Prix. None of the replacements have won the Power award. These are all relevant names to your customer base. Decisions like these keep your turnaround stuck in neutral.
It is all about understanding what is relevant to your customer!!
Michael
In this survey, overall, Chevrolet ranked toward the middle, along with Cadillac. Pontiac was below Hyundai, and GMC was draggin’ the rear somewhere. You can spin this all you want, but overall, GM still suffered in the results.
Hasn’t GM promised us its quality was up, not down? From this JD Powers survey, it appears the opposite is still true: GM has not yet found a way to make high quality cars across its entire lineup. Cherry-picking a couple of vehicles is all well and good, but when you look at the whole picture, well, something’s rotten in the state of Michigan.
I know you have to dress up poor results as best you can, and coupled with Rick Wagoner just about admitting everything he said before yesterday about GM’s future was, in fact, not true, it seems to be a sorry day indeed for GM.
Yet GM thinks it’s doing just fine, according to this story. The reality is it’s not. GM’s friends at Exxon-Mobile (who insisted on GM killing the EV-1) have now made it too expensive for anyone to buy a GM car and operate it at a reasonable price.
And as we all know, the JD Powers surveys are, well, a tad suspect (someone once explained to me how easy it is to manipulate the results, which I’m assuming Porsche did this year in winning the top spot).
Color me jaded…
Michael J
Congratulations on the new Malibu. It’s definitely a great , competative product. Perhaps the marketing guys and gals should promote the hell out of this achievment, because GM’s (low) quality reputation is still holding back buyers, despite the improved quality of the new products.
On a different note, I read recently that there are signs of the Pontiac G3 (read: Aveo) coming to a US dealership near me. I pray that this is just rumor, because the last thing that the Pontiac brand needs is a non-sports sub-compact. Maybe the dealers are screaming for it, but please say it isn’t so. How about giving something to Pontiac that could compete with the Civic Si or Mazdaspeed 3. A true sport-compact would be a welcome addition to GM’s excitement division (heck, even a rebadged Cobalt SS TC would be a start). Right now, a Vibe GT and a G5 GT just don’t make the grade, and the thought of a Pontiac Aveo makes me sick to my stomach.
For a few brief shining moments (Solstice & G8), being a Pontiac fan was becoming a good thing again, but these off-target products make Pontiac a laughing stock.
Gary Dikkers
Let’s talk about maintenance and how that fits with quality.
Back in the day when I was driving a 1955 Chevrolet with a manual transmission, I could do all the maintenance myself. And that included things such as pulling the head and grinding the valves.
Everything on that car was mechanical, and I could adjust and tweak things with little more than a screwdriver and a pair of Channel-Locks.
The cars of that era were so easy to repair, that thousands of pre-1959 GM cars are still on the road in Cuba. Their owners have kept them running with little more than basic mechanical skills, metal working tools, improvisation, and lots of ingenuity.
Could we do that today with your current stable of GM cars? I don’t think so.
Now everything on the car is controlled by computer or processor and when those fail, no amount of mechanical skill or ingenuity can fix it.
If I had a problem with a mechanical carburetor, I could probably fix it with basic mechanical knowledge. Perhaps not perfectly, but could probably get it running. But how do you fix a computer-controlled, electronic fuel injection system that has decided to stop working? One needs an analyzer and access to the trouble codes, or a fistful of money to have a dealer tech look at it.
When a “check engine light” comes on, the average backyard mechanic (the type of mechanic that was responsible for much of the progress of this country in the 1800s and early 1900s) is helpless.
As fuel prices go up, and people have to become more and more self-sufficient, why aren’t your cars easier for people with basic mechanical skills to keep running?
If society starts to disintegrate and I have to rely on that 2008 Malibu in the year 2048, would I be able to keep it running? Or would it become nothing more than an expensive yard ornament that won’t run because the computer chips have quit working and no one has the equipment or means to repair them?
V/R
Gary Dikkers
John turnbow
Where is GM’s 150 MPG CAR
http://gmy.news.yahoo.com/v/8129227
This is NO Fake!!! I want my CAR to get 150 MPG…
I told President Bush, this country does good because of easy, CHEAP travel…
Deliver that and you’ll win everyone over!!!
SteveG
GM did the same thing with the Buick Regal and LeSabre. Good quality ratings, then canceled.
I’m glad to see the good initial quality but what about 4-5 years down the road? Will the Malibu have the same faulty steering as the Cobalt, Impala, Aura, etc?
My 2006 Cobalt just had the steering column and intermediate shaft replaced. The fix lasted 2 months-problems have returned. Same issue with my mothers 2006 Impala-replaced last year, problem never was really solved.
This just shows me that GM replaced known faulty parts with the same faulty parts.
I wouldn’t buy another GM product without at least a 5 yr. bumper to bumper warranty. This is why GM loses customers.
LRiley
Talking about losing customers I live in the all American state of TX, where even babies drive trucks. Guess what the consumer has changed not to GM cars but Toyota corollas, prius, and the highlander. You guys need to study customer buying power give us what you sell in Brazil. You could make a bunch of $$ selling many 45MPG small cars instead of some $ selling 30MPG sedans
Rum Doodle
~ “I wouldn’t buy another GM product without at least a 5 yr. bumper to bumper warranty. This is why GM loses customers.”
Good point Steve. If GM leaders such as Jamie Hresko are so excited and confident about the initial quality of GM motor vehicles, why aren’t they backing up that confidence by offering consumers better warranties?
Lacking better and more comprehensive warranties, Hresko’s confidence does seem to ring hollow.
David MacGillis
“Hasn’t GM promised us its quality was up, not down? From this JD Powers survey, it appears the opposite is still true: GM has not yet found a way to make high quality cars across its entire lineup. Cherry-picking a couple of vehicles is all well and good, but when you look at the whole picture, well, something’s rotten in the state of Michigan.
I know you have to dress up poor results as best you can, and coupled with Rick Wagoner just about admitting everything he said before yesterday about GM’s future was, in fact, not true, it seems to be a sorry day indeed for GM. ”
I think you need to re-review the results. GM’s overall performance was 9% improved over an industry average of 6% improvement.
Steven
Gary Dikkers wrote, “If society starts to disintegrate and I have to rely on that 2008 Malibu in the year 2048, would I be able to keep it running”?
Well Gary that’s the nicest complement you’ve given GM yet. To know you’ll still be driving your 2008 Malibu 40 years later and it still runs.
I’m sure Toyotas will last that long……………NOT!!
As far as Jamie’s excellent article, reading the first few negative comments it once again proves to me and many others that some folks will always find reasons to buy foreign cars to justify their money going to foreign countries. As the gentleman from Germany once wrote on this blog sight Americans don’t seem to want to stay loyal to their country as he sees in his country of Germany. Even most Asians when purchasing a vehicle here in the U.S. will purchase a vehicle from their own country. Maybe they understand the auto industry runs their economy. Case in point:As US auto market share falls so does our economy and the unemployment goes up. Between Ford and GM there are plenty of good quality reliable vehicles that look far better then most of our competitors. I guarantee when GM releases the VOLT in 2010 as originally scheduled there will still be folks that will find something to down play it. It’s time to give GM its Dew.
V/R
Steven
David MacGillis
Gary,
I’ve seen numerous of your comments on this messageboard and I’m somewhat befuddled.
On one hand you ask for vehicles that get great mileage and have fantasic reliability along with extremely low emissions
Yet, in this post you say the vehicles are too complex. I was there when we had points and carburators and vehicles required tune-ups every 10,000 miles and were plagued with stalling and other driveability problems… In addition they each polluted at a rate equivalent to 100 modern automobiles. They weren’t more reliable and the Cuban situation is more out of necessity and inventivness than a matter of simplicity.
motorman
gary dikkers you can thank the feds for the fact you can not repair your own car now. they mandated all this stuff.
Joe
As an employee, I find that we tend to sensesationalize things that really I am not proud of. Yes we had a more improved quality for JDP IQ, but the sad fact is that GM as a whole is not above industry avg. I have heard leadership say ‘We cannot favor one child over another’… but the reckoning has to come. We as a corporation have some of our vehicles above average, but with Saturn and GMC, two of our most recognized brands failing to meet the industry average, there is no reason to celebrate. I thought we paid attention to Deming, when he stated that banners do not improve quality, processes and people do. Waving the good news about a portion of the companies products doesn’t make me feel better, only more challenged to understand we still have work to do. And others may find solace in the fact that we have many brands, and therefore we can rartionalize the difference between success and failure when the other kids don’t live up to their siblings standards. That is wrong and stick your head in the sand thinking. This is a business, no matter how much we value teamwork and comradarie. What we should realize is that with our architecture sharing and development, there should be no difference except between vehicles (car, truck and now CUV for the uninitiated). So shouting about how well we done is fine, except we need to go back and figure out where we went wrong with the kids who didn’t make the grade, and try again to solve the issue instead of letting the customer and the media stating the obvious. Until we can graduate all of our kids from high school, don’t spend all your money on a few going to college!
Charlie H
For once, Gary Dikkers is slightly off base.
But only slightly. Yes, we really need computers and electronic gizmos.
But, even with a heavy dose of electronics and computerization in each, there’s a big difference between cars that are easily maintained and cars that are difficult to maintain.
Does the computer report good diagnostics? Are the sensors adequate, reliable, robust? Did someone put some time and energy into how the computer evaluates responses from the car’s systems to give the owner a solid indication of what’s really wrong? How’s the service manual? Can you get your hands and a tool onto the parts that should be user serviceable or frequently replaced/checked/adjusted?
Even “back in the day,” there was a difference between cars that were easy to maintain and cars that were a pain to maintain. In situations where too much motor was being squeezed into too little car… Well, that was usually trouble.
Then there’s the logistics of spares… Does the entire product line have a lot of common parts, so there’s good availability of spares or are there lots and lots of “unique to this vehicle” parts that are really critical to getting it moving? If I’m buying a Ferrari, it’s OK if it’s all weird-oh parts but for most other vehicles, there’s no reason not to reuse all kinds of things.
Eric Planey
Regarding the rumors of a Pontiac g3 (re Aveo), I dont mind Pontiac having a small car, with $140/barrel oil. BUT PLEASE DONT CALL IT A G3!! If you are going to have Pontiac having performance and econo-cars, dont group them into the same category. Let the performance side have the G-names (G5 is pushing it, but I’ll give you one). If you use the Pontiac Wave name that they use in Canada, you can co-market the car next to Vibe quite well. You would be able to get instant brand recognition. I can see commercials with the 2 cars side by side, one being a cheaper option to the Vibe. Please, for every G3 you would make, you would hurt G8 and G6 sales. Dont do it!
Gary Dikkers
David,
Don’t be befuddled, I’m talking about two separate issues. I’m not even talking about GM. It’s a comment about where our society may be headed.
1. In our modern, high-tech society, there’s nothing wrong with using computers to get optimum performance. I understand the advantages such things as a computer-controlled, electronic fuel injection systems offer.
2. But, in the case where the fabric of society has started to come apart. A society where there may or may not be reliable electrical power on the grid. A society where money has lost it’s value, and where people out of necessity must be more self-sufficent, wouldn’t a fully-mechanical car have the advantage over one that is completely controlled by computer chips?
In a broken down society, would I be better off with a basic VW bug with a simple 4-cylinder engine on which I can do all the maintenance with little more than a screwdriver, crescent wrench, and Vise-Grips; or one on which I can’t understand or fix anything without hooking it to a diagnostic computer?
When and if the crunch comes, would you rather have a simple, completely mechanical VW Bug, or a computer-controlled 2008 Malibu? (If one had to, you could even run a VW Bug without a battery — as long as you parked on a hill, or had a couple of people to give it a running start.)
The Cuban example is exactly my point. Those pre-1959 GM cars still running in Cuba are completely mechanical. Innovative (and desperate) people have been able to keep them running for 50 years with no spare parts, no GM support structure, and with only basic tools.
By the way: I’ve often thought that GM should take advantage of all those 50-year old Pontiacs and Chevies still running up and down the roads of Cuba in their marketing. It certainly makes a point about the durability of those old GM cars.
Best regards,
Gary Dikkers
David MacGillis
“In a broken down society, would I be better off with a basic VW bug with a simple 4-cylinder engine on which I can do all the maintenance with little more than a screwdriver, crescent wrench, and Vise-Grips; or one on which I can’t understand or fix anything without hooking it to a diagnostic computer?
When and if the crunch comes, would you rather have a simple, completely mechanical VW Bug, or a computer-controlled 2008 Malibu? (If one had to, you could even run a VW Bug without a battery — as long as you parked on a hill, or had a couple of people to give it a running start.) ”
All those are great points Gary but unrelated to modern automobles.. Purely mechanical systems cannot hope to meet the emissions standards set by the government, provide optimal fuel economy, or the reliability of systems demanded by today’s customers. Any electronic system on a 2008 Malibu is many orders of magnitude more reliable than it’s mechanical counterpart on a 1968 Malibu. As far as being able to fix it… As long as parts are available and two humans can barter I can fix anything that is broken. Electronics don’t intimidate me.
Obviously if we were living in the world of “I Am Legend” it would be easier to fix something purely mechanical if one were entirely alone. The day-to-day use of those items in our crowded society isn’t realistic or possible given the condition of our planet. I guess if we could keep one in reserve in the eventuality of a collapse of civilization.
bernard a.sznaider
Rearding G.M quality and the rest of the Big Three quality. It’s not about quality, its about the precention of quality. And the Japanese marketers of it got it down pat. Example: Japanese customers on average follow to a T the maintenance requirements of the Japaneses products. The American product customers on average don’t. What product is going to fail first. You have to hand it to them! Plus, they’er into hording profits for research and developement, we’er into share holder value, even if we have to take money away from research and developement to prop up share value. Then we pay our CEO’s Rock Star incomes, even if the company fails. The Japanese pay their CEO’s ten time less, even though they make ten times more profit. Read the book, Extreme Toyota and if you believe that story than you’ve been marketed once again, as the academia reviewer have. But than again Bob Lutz has Rock Star status.
Rick Lupori
Congratulations on the Quality awards for the Malibu and Silverado.
Now when can I buy a Malibu with a 3500 V6 and a EPA rating of 30 MPG?
GM sells the highest MPG 4-cylinder midsize car in the Malibu LTZ (32 MPG) but only offers the best MPG V6 (tie with Accord 29 MPG) to fleets.
Bet with changes similar to the Cobalt XFE a Malibu 3500 V6 would get 30 MPG even with the 4-speed auto.
GM can offer the highest MPG 4cylinder AND V6 midsize in the Malibu in 2009, but will they?
As for the 3.6L please make it DI like the CTS and 2009 Traverse to boost both power and MPG to make a triple crown winning best MPG 4 and V6 with the best power/MPG V6 in the midsize field.
That will sell some cars and boost GM’s image.
J. Luxton
As a loyal GM customer, I must say I’m peeved about plans to shut down a multiple award winning plant in Canada. The Oshawa facilities a known world wide for outstanding quality. I’ve owned a Silverado, a Lumina, a Regal, and now an Impala all produced in Oshawa. I’ll be in the market for another truck in the next year or two, but if it doesn’t come from Oshawa I’ll be taking a closer look at the competition.
A. Desai
It’s a shame that such a big part of American tradition and culture is in the hands of a handful of incompetent executives. From the board to the CEO to the VP’s. I am, as most Americans are, ashamed of GM for not maintaining trust with its customers over the last three decades for producing a product we can be proud to own. Conversely, it is a private corporation after all, therefore, maybe I shouldn’t feel culpable for driving my Honda.
Rum Doodle
~ “I’ll be in the market for another truck in the next year or two, but if it doesn’t come from Oshawa I’ll be taking a closer look at the competition.”
If GM was smart, they’d start building the super-compact Chevy Montana pickup truck they now make in Brazil for the South America market, in either of their soon-to-be-idle assembly plants in Oshawa or Janesville.
Chevrolet Montana
Claude Gelinas
At this point, consumers (from around the world) are expecting GM to produce a line of cars and SUVs that burn fuel much, much, much more efficiently.
Consumers are asking GM to basically switch to electric cars which use a little fuel to recharge the cars’ batteries.
Right now, it looks like GM is afraid to move ahead towards its successful future out of fear of building better cars that won’t need as much costly maintenance – which might upset the dealers.
Consumers need amazing cars and GM can deliver that if only the current administration would dare to dream.
Tony Ventrone
Why has it taken 12 years for GM to develop another electric car? The Volt is still a hybrid, keeping us tied to gas stations. Why didn’t GM improve on the EV1 instead of scrapping the program and the cars? Big oil keeps on winning.
Jim Skelly
I won’t be buying a new GM car until they quit using body-side moldings as pieces of decoration. Most of the new vehicles don’t even have these moldings as standard equipment anymore. The thin, useless moldings that are available offer no protection. You need to put some substantial moldings back on, such as what came standard on the ‘95-’99 Riviera. If the excuse is that moldings provide too much drag, that doesn’t cut it with me. I looked at the new CTS and Malibu, and eliminated both from consideration.
The same applies to the bumpers. They are little more than decorative pieces of trim covering a metal bar. These bumpers offer zero protection to the quarter panels, grille, lights and front fenders. The bumpers should overhang the front fenders and quarter panels such as was used on the ‘73-’76 B-C-D-E bodies. At least if you hit something in a minor collision such as backing into a post, often only the bumper was damaged. Now you have to repair and repaint the sheetmetal, replace taillights or headlights, etc.