My people have suggestions for Detroit. These suggestions tend to center around replacing senior managment and cutting brands and dealers.

Dealers–these companies do have too many dealers. But this hurts the dealers more than it hurts the companies. In the short term at least GM, Ford, and Chrysler would not save much from cutting dealers.

Brands–how many brands of jeans are there? And of toothpaste? The problem isn’t the number of brands, but how they’ve been managed.

Executives–Ford might be getting its act together. At least that’s the impression they give off. GM and Chrysler–not so much. But replacing the current executives with a new bunch, without changing the fundamental structure and culture of these companies, would just yield more of the same. It’d be like replacing one Third World dictator with another–not real change.

So why do critics tend to focus on executives, brands, and dealers? Because those are the things they can see. The classic metaphor of the drunk looking for his keys near the street light, because that’s where he can see? It applies here.