Despite his anti-Semitism and other character flaws, Henry
Ford was a leader with an extraordinary vision. That vision was
made manifest in the Ford Motor Company. But vision, like
the world itself, is dynamic, not static, and must be renewed,
adapted, adjusted. And when it becomes too dim, it must be
abandoned and replaced.
The Ford Motor Company ran on its founder’s vision until
it ran down. Today, Ford, like the rest of America’s auto indus-
try, is fighting for survival. After bleeding billions of dollars
for years, the industry is trying to reinvent itself in a twenty-
first-century context. In late 2008, Ford and the other car
companies hoped for a government rescue package that would
buy them time to reinvent themselves, likely by building more
hybrids and other green cars and marketing to consumers who
care more about endangered species than trunk capacity. If the
Ford Motor Company ultimately succeeds, it will be a collabo-
rative effort, including corporate leaders, innovative designers,
factory workers, unions, and public officials who believe the
auto industry is worth saving. In musical terms, the rescue of
Ford and its competitors will depend on the coordinated
efforts of a full orchestra of contributors working in harmony.
It won’t be the one-man-band that made Henry Ford rich and
famous in a simpler time.
Only the most innovative organizations have begun truly to
tap into their primary resource, their people, much less given
them the means to do what they are capable of doing. Indeed,
many have taken the opposite tack, eschewing loyalty to work-
ers, pruning rather than nurturing, and focusing almost exclu-
sively on the bottom line. In the 1980s, the New York Times
described the corporate scene as characterized by “a generation
of ruthless management.” Starting in 1993, “re-engineering
Organizations Can Help—or Hinder