Back in April, GM CEO Mary Barra testified to Congress
about a massive recall involving GM's Cobalts, many of which carried a
defective ignition switch that could be accidentally turned off by a driver's
heavy keyring. This defect has led
to numerous fatal crashes and lawsuits.
In a public address to GM employees worldwide on June 5, Barra released
a 315-page report detailing the results of an internal investigation into the
switch problem, and used some of the harshest language in memory by a CEO of a
major corporation about the performance of his or her own employees. Thanks to the release of this report,
we now know more about exactly how such a serious defect was allowed in
thousands of cars produced in the mid-2000s, and also why it was so dangerous.
The report gives fascinating insight into how a large,
bureaucratic operation such as GM goes about developing such a complicated
thing as a modern automobile. One way
is specialization. Engineer Ray
DeGiorgio, for example, joined the firm around 1991 and became an
ignition-switch specialist. When a
new design was called for around 2000, he eventually became the Design Release
Engineer on the project that would make a new design of switch for product
lines that eventually became known as Saturn's Ion and Cobalt.
The switch's early development did not go smoothly. Electrical problems plagued both the
prototypes that were lab tested and units that made it into test vehicles. As the deadline for releasing the
switch to production approached, DeGiorgio came under pressure to make
decisions about whether to address a low-torque issue in a design that had
already manifested numerous other problems. Because the thing was finally working, mostly, when the
switch's supplier, Delphi, asked if they should try fixing the torque issue,
DeGiorgio replied "maintain present course." He feared that increasing the torque to
meet specifications in all cases would cause further electrical problems, and
manifested his frustration by signing the email "Ray (tired of the switch
from hell) DeGiorgio."
People tend to be able to deal with only one thing at a
time effectively. While DeGiorgio
knew that a low-torque switch could cause problems such as stalling while in
motion, having a car stall while running once in a while didn't seem as serious
as not being able to start the car at all, which was the result of some of the
electrical problems. It is not
clear that DeGiorgio realized what few other engineers at GM realized
either: that when the switch
accidentally slipped from Run to Accessory while the car was in motion due to
the low-torque problem, this movement would also disable the airbag and the ABS
(anti-lock braking) systems.
Therefore, not only would a driver suddenly find that he or she had lost
power and most of the steering (power steering dies when the engine dies)—the
protection from collisions provided by ABS and airbags also disappeared. As subsequent accidents proved, the
failure of these safety features was a contributing cause to several of the
fatalities that have been ascribed to the ignition-switch problem.
DeGiorgio was not acting maliciously. He was simply trying to do a difficult
job in a timely manner. As far as
we know, he didn't falsify any records.
He was even responsible for fixing the switch-torque problem in 2006,
but he did it in a way that violated established GM policy: he made a silent supplier-specification
change that did not change the part number or notify the rest of the organization
that the new switch was significantly different. As a result, GM and outside investigators spent several
years tracking down the mysterious ignition-switch failures, and trying to
figure out why they disappeared in models built after the hidden 2006 change.
The theologian and philosopher St. Augustine was among the
first to point out that evil is not so much a positive substantial thing in
itself, as it is the absence or privation of something good. DeGiorgio's actions and inactions in
the GM ignition-switch saga are an example of this. Faced with a laundry list of problems, both electrical and
mechanical, he decided in 2002 to let the apparently minor torque issue slide,
rather than delay the process further by trying to fix it at the risk of
upsetting the delicately balanced design further. And he simply didn't know, or didn't think about, the fact
that in the particular vehicles that used the switch, a "moving
stall" (as engineers referred to it) could be very dangerous because it
disabled the ABS and airbag systems, both of which might be especially needed
in negotiating a safe escape from a sudden and surprising loss of power. And when he did a good thing—issuing
the 2006 change that fixed the switch—he also, out of either fear or
reluctance, failed to issue notifications that would point to the existence of
the problem in the first place.
Again, it was not so much a positive action on his part that was faulty,
but inaction, and inaction possibly motivated by fear.
We have not been told whether DeGiorgio was one of the
fifteen people fired as a result of the investigation. Perhaps he made the corporate version
of a plea bargain, agreeing to talk in exchange for his job. Whatever his personal fate, his actions
have entered the ranks of engineering ethics cases, and will probably stay
there for years to come. CEO Barra
has done a great service to the discipline of engineering by being as
forthright and direct as she has been during the course of this issue. I cannot recall any male CEO who faced
a similar problem without blustering, obfuscating, or generally following the
advice of lawyers to admit as little as possible. Listening to Barra, one might almost think that she has told
her lawyers to go where the switch came from, and not bother her while she says
what she wants to say.
CEOs can say anything they want, but making significant
changes in an organization of 220,000 people is a hard task. Nevertheless, in airing so much dirty
laundry, Barra has made a good start toward fixing the systemic managerial and
organizational problems that allowed the defective ignition switches to go
unnoticed for so long. She has
also presented a good example for other CEOs of major corporations to follow in
'fessing up to ethical lapses.
Sources: Mary Barra's "global town
hall" meeting remarks were reported in USA Today on June 5 at http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2014/06/05/gm-ceo-mary-barra-speech-switch-recall-report/10012715/. I referred to the (redacted for privacy
of private individuals) "Report to Board of Directors of General Motors
Company Regarding Ignition Switch Recalls" dated May 29, 2014, which is
currently available from a news item on the main page of the National Highway
and Transportation Safety Board website (www.nhtsa.gov). I also referred to the Wikipedia
article on the Ford Pinto. I
blogged on Barra's testimony to Congress in this space on April 7, 2014.
Thanks to the release of this report, now we know more about exactly how such a serious defect was allowed in thousands of cars produced in the mid-2000s, and also why it was so dangerous.
ReplyDelete