General Motors CEO

Mary Barra
Mary Barra started working at General Motors when only 18 as a co-op student in 1980 (Colby,
2015). Now, she is Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the General Motors
Company, a position she’s held since January 4, 2016 (About GM: Mary T. Barra, 2018).
Throughout the 33 years of service she dedicated to General Motors, she has climbed the ranks,
playing the role of executive vice president of global product development, purchasing and
supply chain since 2013, August, and senior vice president since 2011, February, as well as plant
manager, executive director of vehicle manufacturing engineering, vice president of human
resources and product development. During her mandate in these roles, Mary Barra and her
teams were in charge of the engineering, quality and design of General Motors vehicles (About
GM: Mary T. Barra, 2018). Now, she is the first female CEO of an automotive industry in the
world.
Mary Barra has showcased her success as a leader through the toughest times of General Motors
– the bankruptcy filed in 2009 and the aftermath. She faced her greatest challenge named
“Switchgate” starting in 2014 as the CEO, a manufacturing issue related to car ignition which
resulted in 100 deaths, which was until her time hidden from the public. Mary Barra, being
driven by integrity, knew what her first move would be. She acknowledged the problem publicly,
initiated a full investigation, and committed that General Motors would make up for it, without a
concern about the cost (Johnson, Shelton, 2014). The move on her part was a risky one, which
would redefine the corporate culture of General Motors. Mary knew that a big change was
necessary, and she redirected the General Motors’ focus onto three factors – excellence, customer
and relationships. Transparency was highlighted in the company – as she initiated a program
named “Speak Up for Safety”, where employees were encouraged to report issues, instead of
being punished. Her goals for the company shifted from being the biggest, to being the best –
stressing quality at every level. Mary pulled GM from global markets such as Europe, Russia,
South Africa and India by 2015, transforming GM into a corporation prepared for the future of
the automotive industry (Colby, 2015). Today, General Motors are growing and the stock price
has reached its highest value in October, 2017.
Path-goal theory. The path-goal theory is complex in nature, as well as pragmatic (Northouse,
2016). According to Yukl (2013), the path-goal theory of leadership analyses how situational
factors determine what kind of leadership is necessary in order to boost employees’ job
satisfaction and effort they invest into work. This theory falls under the category of contingency
theories of leadership, due to the effectiveness depending on the composition between leader
behavior and traits of subordinates and task at hand. According to Northouse (2016), the path-
goal theory of leaderships originates its roots from expectancy theory (Vroom, 1964), which
states that subordinates will feel motivation if the results from the work they put in is valuable, if
they feel competent and if they are led by the belief that their efforts will be rewarded. By
adjusting leadership style (participative, directive, supportive or achievement oriented), the
leader can help subordinates to fill in what is missing in the current task or work setting
(Northouse, 2016). The path-goal theory relies of the four pillars of leadership effectiveness
(Jermier, 1996), as it is based on House’s (1971) former version of the theory which he named
“path-goal theory of leader effectiveness”. The first pillar is directive leadership (House,
Mitchell, 1974), and according to Mumford (2009), the leader should be able to inform
subordinates on what is expected of them and be able to properly explain how to perform tasks,
as the leader should create a clear path for subordinates to know their way and how to handle
situations. Second pillar is supportive leadership (House, Mitchell, 1974), which is, according to
Dunbar (2009), when leaders take the needs of subordinates into consideration, as well as
showing concern for their welfare and create a friendly, supportive environment. The third pillar
is what House and Mitchell (1974) call achievement-oriented leadership, which Bertocci (2009)
explains as leaders having to remove obstacles from their subordinates’ paths in order for them to
achieve their goals, as well as House and Mitchel (1974) claim - setting high challenging goals to
their subordinates and challenge their capabilities to achieve the goal. The fourth pillar is
participative leadership, involving team members in the decision making process. All four pillars
are applicable in different situations according to the needs of the subordinate and the task at
hand. For example, directive leadership is successful in dealing with ambiguous tasks, while
supportive leadership succeeds in repetitive tasks, participative is appropriate when tasks are
uncertain and subordinates are independently capable, while achievement-oriented is great for
tasks of a challenging nature (Northouse, 2016).
Leadership skills. According to Katz’s (1955) research in administration, he suggests that
successful leadership depends on three basic personal skills: technical, human, and conceptual.
Mary Barra showcases skills from all three general fields of skills presented by Katz.
Knowledgeable about the work*. When it comes to technical skills, the fact that she has been
working in manufacturing and engineering since the beginning of her career at GM, as well as

showing preference towards these fields of work, and having a BSc in electrical engineering and
MBA (Colby, 2015) proves her knowledge and technical skill in the field of automotive
engineering, design and manufacturing is not to be taken lightly. Her experience in General
Motors of 33 years and the diverse positions she has held during that time showcased in the about
section the General Motors website - About GM: Mary T. Barra (2018, January), also shows her
flexibility, adaptability and intelligence to excel at any challenge thrown at her and the roles she
has gone through. Her functions prior to becoming Chairman and CEO of GM were as follows:
executive vice president of global product development, purchasing and supply chain, senior vice
president of global product development, vice president of global human resources, vice
president of global manufacturing engineering, plant manager of Detroit Hamtramck Assembly,
as well as several other executive engineering and staff positions (About GM: Mary T. Barra,
2018, January).
Human skills are described as “people skills” by Northouse (2016), which are abilities helping
the leader to successfully work with peers, subordinates and superiors, in order to achieve set
goals for the organization. Socially skilled. Barra does not lack social or people skills whatsoever,
as Gover (2017) describes her as talented in communication, which was showcased in the 1998
strike, when there was a major communication gap between union workers, engineers and
corporate executives. Mary Barra was selected by a senior executive to solve this communication
issue, when her title was general director of internal communications. What she did to solve this
issue is to place a communications professional in each GM manufacturing facility, instructing
them to update workers on the site’s quality, cost and performance numbers in comparison to
other GM plants. This format of communications had become the standard for General Motors to
this day. She has been described by colleagues and mentors as a great listener and very
approachable. According to Engelmeier (2014, January 22), several sources confirm her creating
an inclusive space for employees to express their ideas and opinions, in which the diverse ideas
are collected by Barra, and provided feedback. According to Matousek (2018, January 11), she
has been praised for her capability to communicate with subordinates and peers, while making
them feel valuable. Several colleagues added that she leads by example of loyalty and kindness,
as well as making sure that everyone is heard Matousek (2018, January 11). In an interview with
Hirsch for the Los Angeles Times (2013, December 13), Mary Barra described her management
style as collaborative, stressing the importance of team work and everyone being heard. In an
article for Center for Work Life, Hedayati (2014, January 8) describes Barra as respectful
towards her colleagues – saying she puts trust into them and offers responsibilities to draw out
the best in people. The best example of Mary’s respectful attitude is the case when she simplified
the dress code so as to allow employees use their own judgement. Her famous response to a
manager’s complaint about this decision was “so you’re telling me I can trust you to give you a
company car and to have you responsible for tens of millions of dollars, but I can’t trust you to
dress appropriately?” (Hedayati, 2014, January 8). When asked by Quartz at Work’s Fessler
(2018, February 6) what a key part of building successful professional relationships is, she
responded that she spends time getting to know her coworkers, their families and what is
important to them. Conceptual skills, according to Northouse (2016), are the power to navigate
ideas and concepts. “Whereas technical skills deal with things and human skills deal with people,
conceptual skills involve the ability to work with ideas” (Northouse, 2016, p. 45). Conceptually
skilled. When
Mary Barra became CEO in 2014, having to deal with “Switchgate”, she was faced with a
challenge she could only solve with a new idea – transparency. Her ideas were considered to be
unconventional, but having faced the problem head on and taking all the responsibility on
herself, she pulled GM out of the crisis. She presented the idea of the program called “Speak Up
for Safety” (Ellis, 2017), where the employees were rewarded for reporting issues. In 1998, Mary
created a support system for women at her company, which helped women with issued they
would face in the work field. Later on, the support group instigated the creation of affinity groups
for minorities and women, which helped them with career development, networking and
mentoring in Canada. Barra has created the successor to these groups, which is known as GM
WOMEN, standing for
“women offering mentoring, expertise, and networking” (Colby, 2015). When it comes to
innovation, Mary is future oriented. Engelmeier (2014, January 22) reported that Barra “she
increased efficiency through product innovation and created more vehicles that shared the same
parts”. Engelmeier also adds that she had the General Motors’ purchasing and product
development departments to join forces and work together, which was a never before seen move.
Leadership behavior. When it comes to leadership behavior, Yukl (2013) describe a three
dimensional model consisting of task-oriented, relations-oriented and change-oriented behavior.
For this section I will present a leadership behavior of Mary Barra from each of these
dimensions. When it comes to task-oriented behavior, Mary is always action-oriented “because
there’s always a way to move forward”, as she confirmed in an interview with Fessler (2018,
February 6) when asked what did she do when she felt the most despondent. As previously
mention, one of her strengths is assigning work to groups, dividing the work and responsibilities
among her employees. For relations-oriented behavior, Barra has had a huge impact on the
recruitment of her company – promoting a more inclusive recruitment regime, but not without
highlighting the importance of qualifications (Colby, 2015). This has resulted in a diverse
workforce with competent employees representing different perspectives. Lastly, for change
oriented behavior, many news articles (Matousek, 2018, January 11; Hirsch, 2013, December
13). covered stories of her innovations, technology and future oriented plans for General Motors
– now working on the fourth generation on driverless cars, while some companies still haven’t
started their first generation.
Leadership traits. Attribution theory has had many authors making taxonomies of leadership
traits necessary for success, and one of those lists were created by Yukl (2013) as a summary of
numerous research of successful leaders. Three of these characteristics will be presented for
Mary Barra. Integrity. Barra took the first opportunity as CEO to show her integrity and what she
stood for – she publicly admitted to the ignition issue which resulted in deaths of a hundred
employees, began a recall of over 2.5 million cars with broken ignition switches which could
have turned off cars and prevent airbags from activating during crashes (Matousek, 2018,
January 11). She redirected the focus of General Motors to customer satisfaction, excellence and
hard work (Ellis, 2017, June 9). She established the PILOT “Winning with Integrity”, which is a
code of conduct serving as a reminder to employees to be passionate and work hard, but the right
way (Gover, 2017). Determination. Team work and collaborative work is what everyone praises
Barra for, but when a unanimous decision cannot be made by the team, she steps in to do it
without hesitation (Hirsch, 2013, December 13). She is driven, persistent, and quick to resolve
issues. She was described as having a persevering attitude and being decisive by Hedayati (2014,
January 8). One example is during 2008, when GM fell into bankruptcy. Barra had not shown a
shred of doubt that the company would survive. She reported to Stanford’s Tankersley (2011,
September/October) that it was indeed a difficult time, but she was confident that they would get
through. When faced with challenges, Mary Barra perseveres and pulls General Motors through.
She has the ability to make swift decisions, take risks, apply unconventional ways to her problem
solving, and take initiative in critical situations. Sociability. Mary Barra has shown sociability
through her interaction with employees, showing interest in their lives, getting to know their
families and their interests. She includes everyone in the decision making process, makes sure
everyone is heard and feels valuable. She has helped out her superiors numerous times and has
shown reliability and trustworthiness (Colby, 2015).
Main skill, behavior and trait - Displaying numerous virtues as a leader, many coworkers
support her biggest quality, being a participative/inclusive leader, taking into consideration her
teams’ ideas and uniting them into an innovative product. Her main skill as a leader is the
delegation she performs, showing trust and respect to everyone, while serving as an anchor in
leading General Motors to success. She adjusts her leadership style depending on the situation –
when the group cannot make an agreement, she will show initiative and assertiveness. For
behavior, she is very much conceptually oriented – her problem solving technique is visionary
and bold, breaking the ice fearlessly into the market and taking responsibility for mistakes made
on behalf of the company. She has remade the recruitment approach and involved more qualified
women and minorities in the automotive industry. Where everyone was missing out, she saw an
opportunity. Her strongest trait – determination – has pulled her through 33 years of service in
the General Motors organization, fighting for the company on every front from manufacturing,
design, engineering to human resources, management and now leading the company. Barra has
her eyes on the future of the industry, having GM even beat Tesla’s Model 3 with the Chevrolet
Bolt EV (The World's 50 Greatest Leaders, 2018, April 19).
Application to theory - The path-goal theory was chosen due to its diverse application and
showcases Mary Barra’s versatility in leadership. First of all, her display of directive leadership
is evident in cases such as the rapid reduction of the formal dress code. Barra created a situation
in which managers can make their own decision and use their judgement. She advised the
managers complaining to this policy to address their concerns with their employees and
communicate in order to address the issue. When it comes to supportive leadership, as mentioned
previously, she displays a great deal of concern for the needs of her subordinates, includes them
in decision making, praises her team in interviews, always addresses the people working for
General Motors when talking about the success of the company. The third pillar of path-goal
theory is achievementoriented leadership, which Mary showcases in her never-ending quest to
achieve better, make better cars and never stop improving (Ellis, 2017, June 9). In an interview
with Esquire (Fussman, 2018, February 6), she advised not to confuse progress with winning, “if
the world is improving at 10 percent and you’re improving at 2 percent, you might be improving,
but you’re losing” (Mary
Barra, Esquire, 2018, February 6). Finally, participative leadership is one that describes Mary
Barra’s style best. Her decision to recruit the most competent and qualified of team members
allows her to use participative leadership, as she motivates her team members and cherishes their
qualities which lead to team success. Barra has a firm belief that everyone wants to contribute
and do a good job.
Success of the leadership style - Mary Barra’s achievements have been evident throughout her
entire career at General Motors, and now especially since she became CEO. She saved General
Motors after their bankruptcy filing, increased the value of the company, reduced unprofitable
markets and focused on customer satisfaction, quality and hard work. Barra’s approach to
leadership, as described as mainly inclusive, has been successful in creating teams competent to
innovate new, future, technologically advanced vehicles. Her navigation through the crisis has
transformed General motors from a dreary symbol of the old guard to one of the leading
companies in automotive innovation (Matousek, 2018, January 11). The main issue in General
Motors before
Barra’s leadership was described by Barra herself as a “lack of leadership, and extensive
compartmentalization within the company, which discouraged information sharing” (Weinstein,
Morton, 2015, p. 1). Barra described the “GM nod” as everyone agreeing to a proposed plan of
action, but there was no action taken after the dismissal of the meeting. Mary Barra’s actions in
crisis, leading to results and numbers on the stock market today say more about her success than
words. General Motors is competing neck-in-neck with Elon Musk’s Tesla in the electric car
manufacturing, design and innovation market, making the leadership of Mary Barra a successful
one in just four years of reign. Her leadership style was successful because she integrated team
work and collaboration into the main decision making process, as well as because she addressed
the issues and showed remorse for the mistakes made. Her leadership style was successful
because her decision-making skills and innovation brought General Motors to the future swift
and focused on quality. According to Yukl (2013, p. 164) “subordinates will perform better when
they have clear and accurate role expectations, they perceive that a high level of effort is
necessary to attain task objectives, they are optimistic that it is possible to achieve the task
objectives, and they perceive that high performance will result in beneficial outcomes”. Her
inclusive style of leadership has achieved the beneficial outcomes Yukl has described.
Leadership improvement recommendation - According to aforementioned information on
Mary Barra’s qualities, I will address some improvement recommendations based on the path-
goal theory. According to House’s (1996) reformulated path-goal theory, which add four new
pillars to the original four ones (work facilitation, group-oriented decision process, value-based
leadership and work-group representation and networking), Barra fills in all the requirements for
a path-goal leadership style. Her value-based leadership, accent on team work and team
representation is a perfect representation of this approach to leadership. However, according to
the theory, I have failed to find a motivational tool used by Barra, except for encouragement and
respect for her coworkers. There have not been any studies researching job satisfaction among
her employees, to confirm whether this approach is successful on every front. One thing for
Barra to improve on is her assessment of her worker’s weaknesses and how can she compensate
for their deficiencies in their abilities. Follow-up feedback on her leadership from her coworkers
is encouraged.
Summary. In summary, leader of General Motors, CEO and Chairman Mary Barra, has shown
success after success since the start of her leadership in 2014. Long before she became CEO, she
has shown leadership potential and abilities, ever since her studies until now, 33 years later. Her
flexibility and adaptability, as well as educational background in electrical engineering and
business administration, in combination with achievement-oriented behavior and strength in
maintaining relationships with her coworkers while navigating team work and using it to its
highest potential has propelled her to the position where she is now. When the board was
choosing a new CEO, she was in competition with three other male candidates, and she was
unanimously chosen for that responsibility and position. What Barra has done in the four years
since is unprecedented, and with her future-oriented and innovative mind, the possibilities are
endless and her success will only proceed to grow.
In conclusion, I will add three pie charts visually representing her leadership style in the classic
path-goal theory (chart 1 – four pillars), in the newer one reformulated by House (1996) (chart
2), as well as a general comparison to other leadership approaches she could also be defined by
(chart 3). Leadership styles which have a potential in describing her approach are situational,
charismatic, transformational, ethical and participative leadership. Path-goal approach to
leadership was chosen due to its over-arching scope of characteristics which describe Barra best,
but some examples for as to why other leadership styles were chose will be given. She herself
has described her management style as collaborative (participative leadership), while bringing in
visionary ideas to improve and change the company, emerging when the company is in crisis
(charismatic), adjusting decision making to situation (situational), putting transparency at the
forefront (ethical), and motivating her subordinates to use their potential (transformational).
Mary
Barra’s strengths are represented in table 4, independent of theories, based on research.
 TABLE
- PAT-GOAL -4
1 H LEADERSHIP PILLAR
Achievement- S
Directive leadership
oriented leadership

Supportive
leadership
Participative
leadership

TABLE- PAT-GOAL LEADERSHIP, HOUSE -8

2 H 1996
Value-based
leadership behavior Directive leadership
PILLAR
Work-group S
representation and Participative
networking leadership

Group-oriented
decision process Supportive
leadership

Work facilitation Achievement-

oriented leadership
 Table 3 - Leadership styles
Ethical leadership
8%

Participative Path-goal leadership

42% Path-goal leadership
leadership
20% Situational leadership
Charismatic leadership
Transformational leadership
Transformational Participative leadership
leadership
10% Ethical leadership
Charismatic
leadership Situational
10% leadership
10%

Table 4- Leadership characteristics

Risk-taking Ethical
8% 8% Transparent
Intelligent
10% 7%
Action-oriented
Adaptive 8%
8%

Collaborative
Future-oriented 10%
8%

Directive
Visionary 8%
10%
Innovative Supportive
8% 7%

Ethical Transparent Action-oriented Collaborative Directive Supportive

Innovative Visionary Future-oriented Adaptive Intelligent Risk-taking

References

About GM: Mary T. Barra. (2018, January), General Motors. Retrieved from http://www.gm.com/
Bertocci, D. I. (2009). Leadership in organizations: There is a difference between leaders and
managers. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

Colby, L. (2015). Road to Power: How GM's Mary Barra Shattered the Glass Ceiling. John Wiley
& Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey

Dunbar, S. B. (2009). An occupational perspective on leadership: Theoretical and practical

dimensions. Thorofare, NJ: Slack Incorporated.

Ellis, B. (2017, June 9). Mary Barra – Transforming General Motors Through Powerful
Leadership. Branding for Results. Retrieved from http://brandingforresults.com/

Engelmeier, S. (2014, January 22). Did Mary Barra’s Inclusive Leadership Style Propel Her to
The Top? Industry Week. Retrieved from http://www.industryweek.com/

Fessler, L. (2018, February 6). GM CEO Mary Barra says too many women quit their jobs for the
wrong reason. Quartz at Work. Retrieved from https://work.qz.com/

Fussman, C. (2016, April 26). What I've Learned: Mary Barra. Esquire. Retrieved from
https://www.esquire.com/

Gover, J. (2017). Reflections – Mary Barra. IEEE Engineering Management Review, vol. 45, no.
2, second quarter

Hedayati, F. (2014, January 8). Mary Barra’s Leadership. Center for Work Life. Retrieved from
http://www.centerforworklife.com/

Hirsch, J. (2013, December 13). Mary Barra new CEO at GM, most powerful female exec in
America [Q&A]. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://www.latimes.com/ House, R. J.
(1971). A path-goal theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly,

16, 321–339.

House, R. J., & Mitchell, R. R. (1974). Path-goal theory of leadership. Journal of Contemporary
Business, 3, 81–97.

House, R. J. (1996). Path–goal theory of leadership: Lessons, legacy, and a reformulated

theory. Leadership Quarterly, 7(3), 323–352.
 Jermier, J. M. (1996). The path-goal theory of leadership: A subtextual analysis. The Leadership
Quarterly, 7(3), 311–316.

Johnson, C. E., & Shelton, P. (2014). Ethical Leadership in the Age of Apology. International
Leadership Journal, 6(3), 7–29.

Matousek, M. (2018, January 11). Mary Barra was called a 'lightweight' when she became CEO
of GM — here's how she transformed the company and silenced her doubters.
Business Insider Nordic. Retrieved from http://nordic.businessinsider.com/

Mumford, M. D. (2009). Leadership 101. New York, NY: Springer

Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice, seventh edition. Sage Publications, Inc:
USA

The World's 50 Greatest Leaders. (2018, April 19), Fortune. Retrieved from http://fortune.com/

Tankersley, J. (2011, September/October). What Drives Mary Barra. Stanford Alumni. Retrieved from
https://alumni.stanford.edu/

Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York, NY: Wiley

Weinstein, J., & Morton, L. H. (2015). Collaboration and Teamwork. Faculty Scholarship, Paper 163.

View publication stats