The dramatic reduction of the design cycle started with GM getting itsinternal systems in order, a process that involved standardizing on asingle system (Unigraphics), a single product data management system(I-Man) and a single data model for all of GM's 14 design engineeringcenters. After getting the ball rolling on intra-GM collaboration,Gutmann's group started working toward achieving closer links in thedesign process. Co-designing a given automotive part helps ensure thatthe supplier can meet the specifications for that part and also beginthe retooling and production process earlier. GM shares both designtools and data files with suppliers, and partially or fullyunderwrites the cost of software licenses for selectsuppliers.

It's going to take some time for true co-design to pervade the autoindustry supply chain; a 2001 research study by the Center forAutomotive Research found only 12 percent of the respondents were injoint product design with other suppliers. Meanwhile, the competitionwon't stand still. DaimlerChrysler, for example, has formed a B2Binfrastructure group dubbed E-Connect and recently boasted timereductions of 60 percent to 90 percent in certain steps of its designprocess. Nevertheless, GM has made great progress in thisarea.

No small irony: A retiring GM lifer recently commented to Wagoner, "Ifyou keep it up, you'll be able to make cars as fast as we did in the1950s," when vehicle complexity and regulatory requirements weresimpler and the cycle took one year.

The Big Picture

With GM forging so many e-business connections, the fate of eGM is amoot point. In fact, GM's B2C efforts are far less important than theB2B work. And the approach to e-business projects reflects afundamental change in GM's thinking, which should prevail regardlessof eGM's future.