An intriguing look into the inner workings of Detroit is presented in the book, "Detroit 1985," by Donald MacDonald, who spent the better part of 20 years covering the automotive scene for such publications as Business Week, Motor Trend, the New York Times and others. Published by Doubleday & Co., it's billed as "An irreverent look at the automakers, the dealers, the government and you."
While giving an enlightening look at some areas and problems most automakers would care not to think about, such as warranty claims, dealer markups and safety defects, the title in a way is deceptive. Perhaps the title should read Detroit 1975 or Detroit 1980 for it gives little insight into what is going to happen in the auto industry in the next five years, a period which may prove to be one of great upheavals in the way Detroit does business.
Instead, the book dwells on the Bigness (with a capital B) is Bad concept and recommends that divestiture of the Big Three or Four (however, given the turn of events of the past year, perhaps that should be read the Big Two) into a number of independent competitive makes would be the best for the industry and the public. There's a catch to it for those who are quick to ask how a small company can afford to meet the massive governmental regulations that go into the building of a car, for Mac Donald recommends that at the same time the automakers divest themselves of their many car and component divisions that the huge bureaucracy that regulates the auto industry be also dismantled. A novel idea.
Throughout the book, interspersed between the anecdotes, stories of personal rivalries at the top and product successes and failures, Mac Donald uses over and over again examples of how well things worked during the golden Age of Automobiles (circa 1929 to 1939). For example, in a chapter titled 'The Experimental Affordable Car" he writes, "The truly simple car is not an impossibility. Those that qualify are abundant in history, the Model T just being the best known example. A better illustration for my thesis, also from the same maker, would be Ford's first eight cylinder car of 1932. Here was a 70-horsepower package of utilitarian driving excitement that weighed only 2,000 pounds in roadstar form and sold for $460, only $10 more than the stodgy four cylinder Model A which it replaced. It was adequately sized and comfortable, but hardly luxurious. It also, with a touch of modern engineering, could meet a CAFÉ of 27.5 miles to the gallon.
Granted, the Ford Model A was a milestone in its time. But it's like the old saying, "the past is like a foreign country, they do things differently back there." And granted, in basic function, the car really hasn't changed since it was invented. But today's car will take you further, faster, more efficiently with less maintenance. In addition, it is cleaner, safer and infinitely more complex. That is the key. The whole world has become infinitely more complex and it would be difficult to start a company and build a socially responsible car. The Ford Model A built today would not be a socially responsible car by today's standards. MacDonald feels that by forcing the major manufacturers to divest, that the car would become more socially responsive because there would be more competition, and smaller organizations where the consumer and worker alike would have access to top management. It sounds like a good idea, but is it workable? He says yes, especially with GM and he adds that there is much duplication of effort on the part of the giant automaker. He decries their management by committee and feels it is impersonal and unresponsive noting the old saw "A camel is a horse designed by committee" several times. (He reports that the saying originated somewhere within Ford.) However, one will get farther through a desert on a camel than a horse and in these energy scarce times, a camel may be more preferable. Remember, management by committee brought us the X-car, while management by one person delayed downsizing by two model years.
Perhaps divestiture in Detroit 1975 would have worked, but divestiture in Detroit 1985 may not. The auto industry's back is against the wall. Many changes are being made at a pace unheard of, even in the Golden Age of Automobiles. Perhaps Bigness is Bad, but given our dependency on foreign oil, the technological pace of import competition and the onus of government regulation. Bigness is the only choice we have in the short run.
The book is worth your while to read, it challenges the accepted beliefs of the automobile industry and the anecdotes are interesting. It's also ironic that the publisher of MacDonald's book, Doubleday & Co., also published Alfred P. Sloan's "My Years With General Motors."
