Case Study:    General Motors's New Top Buyer In the spring of 1992, Ignacio Lopez de Arriortua hit Detroit like a storm.  General Motors was in trouble and needed help, so the company’s president appointed Lopez as the vice president of global purchasing.  He had saved the company millions of dollars in its European operation and set out to do the same for the entire corporation.  His goal was to save the company $5 billion in purchasing costs in 1993 alone. Lopez approached his mission like a military commander.  He dubbed his employees “warriors” and moved a group of young managers into key positions.  He convened a series of intense meetings steeped in the rhetoric of war.  At these meetings, he insisted that the Western world is under attack, adding that saving GM was tantamount to saving Western civilization.  Attendees reported being overwhelmed by scores of PowerPoint slides that Lopez projected to support his points.  “It’s a message that’s as crafty as it is captivating,” suppliers say.  “He knows how to pounce on the emotional needs of an audience,” said Donald C. Trausch, president of Borg-Warner Corporation. Lopez created upheaval.  He immediately sent a directive to all GM suppliers that costs had to be cut by as much as 10 percent.  Contracts were canceled and suppliers had to resubmit proposals.  He said he would work with suppliers only if they guaranteed to cut prices every year.  Some suppliers were extremely angry, while others were happy about the chance to do business with the huge auto company. Lopez received considerable attention because he was responsible for purchasing billions of dollars’ worth of parts.  However, some of the attention he received and maybe even enemies made were because of his communication style.  For example, when he arrived in Detroit, he issued a 44-page health manifesto titled “Feeding the Warrior Spirit."  He told his employees they would have to follow his diet to remain competitive in his purchasing organization.  In addition, he told everyone, including the company president, to wear their watches on their right hands to remind them of the trouble faced by GM.  And his Basque accent could be perplexing, as he frequently caught people off guard.  At one interview, he replied, “I laugh at your question,” as he unnerved the journalist.  He tore into people as he demanded performance.  He responded to allegations that he might be too tough by saying, “It is tough, but it is fair.” Although some were extremely critical of Lopez, others were complimentary.  “Lopez comes through and hits you over the head with a 2-by-4 and starts you bleeding.  Then he puts on a bandage and helps you heal,” said one manager.  A vice president of GM in Europe said, “Lopez has been tremendously misunderstood.  The bottom line is that his teams get in and do it."  When accused of possibly causing too much stress in the organization, Lopez simply shrugged, “We do not have the time.  If we had three years, we could m ...

1. Case Study: General Motors's New Top Buyer
In the spring of 1992, Ignacio Lopez de Arriortua hit Detroit
like a storm. General Motors was in trouble and needed help,
so the company’s president appointed Lopez as the vice
president of global purchasing. He had saved the company
millions of dollars in its European operation and set out to do
the same for the entire corporation. His goal was to save the
company $5 billion in purchasing costs in 1993 alone.
Lopez approached his mission like a military commander. He
dubbed his employees “warriors” and moved a group of young
managers into key positions. He convened a series of intense
meetings steeped in the rhetoric of war. At these meetings, he
insisted that the Western world is under attack, adding that
saving GM was tantamount to saving Western civilization.
Attendees reported being overwhelmed by scores of PowerPoint
slides that Lopez projected to support his points. “It’s a
message that’s as crafty as it is captivating,” suppliers say. “He
knows how to pounce on the emotional needs of an audience,”
said Donald C. Trausch, president of Borg-Warner Corporation.
Lopez created upheaval. He immediately sent a directive to all
GM suppliers that costs had to be cut by as much as 10 percent.
Contracts were canceled and suppliers had to resubmit
proposals. He said he would work with suppliers only if they
guaranteed to cut prices every year. Some suppliers were
extremely angry, while others were happy about the chance to
do business with the huge auto company.
Lopez received considerable attention because he was
responsible for purchasing billions of dollars’ worth of parts.
However, some of the attention he received and maybe even
enemies made were because of his communication style. For
example, when he arrived in Detroit, he issued a 44-page health
manifesto titled “Feeding the Warrior Spirit." He told his
employees they would have to follow his diet to remain
competitive in his purchasing organization. In addition, he told

2. everyone, including the company president, to wear their
watches on their right hands to remind them of the trouble faced
by GM. And his Basque accent could be perplexing, as he
frequently caught people off guard. At one interview, he
replied, “I laugh at your question,” as he unnerved the
journalist. He tore into people as he demanded performance.
He responded to allegations that he might be too tough by
saying, “It is tough, but it is fair.”
Although some were extremely critical of Lopez, others were
complimentary. “Lopez comes through and hits you over the
head with a 2-by-4 and starts you bleeding. Then he puts on a
bandage and helps you heal,” said one manager. A vice
president of GM in Europe said, “Lopez has been tremendously
misunderstood. The bottom line is that his teams get in and do
it." When accused of possibly causing too much stress in the
organization, Lopez simply shrugged, “We do not have the
time. If we had three years, we could make everything
comfortable and no one would be fearful.”
Assignment Requirements
Write a two page case analysis (plus a cover page and a
references page). Be sure to include a brief summary of the
critical aspects of the case in light of the course readings and
topics. Analyze the situation from the perspective of
managerial communications.
In the analysis section of your paper, you should consider Mr.
Lopez’s style in relationship to what was discussed in your
assigned readings. Consider whether Mr. Lopez attempted to
empower employees and the role of cultural diversity in
reaction to Mr. Lopez. Finally, discuss whether you believe Mr.
Lopez created job stress. Support your analysis with references
to pertinent published, scholarly resources. You must use APA
style when creating citations and a references list.
The final section of your paper must include conclusions and a
recommendation. When writing the final section, reflect on
what could have been done to more effectively communicate

3. and what should be done now, after the communication resulted
in hurt feelings.
Refer to the sources of APA information and examples indicated
on your syllabus and the APA summary PowerPoint available to
you on the Canvas site.
Rubric
F19-Case Study Rubric
F19-Case Study Rubric
Criteria
Ratings
Pts
Knowledge
35.0 to >31.5 pts
Proficient
Demonstrates comprehension through substantial synthesis and
evaluation of concepts.
31.5 to >28.0 pts
Competent
Demonstrates comprehension through some integration and
evaluation of key concepts and terms.
28.0 to >24.5 pts
Marginal
Partially integrated or evaluated key concepts.
24.5 to >0.0 pts
Weak
Did not include, mention or discuss key concepts or coverage of
key concepts was inadequate or inaccurate.
0.0 pts
No Marks
35.0 pts
Thinking and Analysis
35.0 to >31.5 pts
Proficient
Provided substantive and appropriate evaluation, conclusions
and application of concepts and terms. Identified and analyzed

4. alternative views without bias and drew valid and supported
conclusions. Used examples and cited scholarly research.
31.5 to >28.0 pts
Competent
Provided some evaluation, conclusions and application of
concepts and terms. Identified and analyzed alternative views
without bias using some examples and citing scholarly research.
28.0 to >24.5 pts
Marginal
Provided limited evaluation and application of concepts and
terms. Identified and analyzed alternative views using limited
examples. Did not cite scholarly research.
24.5 to >0.0 pts
Weak
Provided weak or ineffective evaluation and application of
concepts and terms. Did not identify or analyze alternative
views. Did not provide examples and did not cite scholarly
research.
0.0 pts
No Marks
35.0 pts
Support of Assessments
10.0 to >9.0 pts
Proficient
Provided support of assessments and evaluations through
research and use of scholarly resources.
9.0 to >8.0 pts
Competent
Provided some support for assessments and evaluations by
citing textbook and some academic resources. Some statements
should have been supported with references to scholarly
resources.
8.0 to >6.0 pts
Marginal
Limited use of scholarly references. Primarily used non-

5. academic references. Did not provide adequate attribution.
6.0 to >0.0 pts
Weak
Did not use scholarly references. Did not provide attribution
when necessary.
0.0 pts
No Marks
10.0 pts
Focus, Organization & Structure
10.0 to >9.0 pts
Proficient
Demonstrated well-developed focus, thorough points of
development, and a logical pattern or organization of ideas and
concepts.
9.0 to >8.0 pts
Competent
Demonstrated good focus with average development and logical
organization of ideas and concepts.
8.0 to >6.0 pts
Marginal
Limited focus with irregular development of theme. Did not
adequately or logically organize ideas and concepts.
6.0 to >0.0 pts
Weak
Lack of a clear focus and insufficient development of theme.
Lack of logical organization of ideas and concepts.
0.0 pts
No Marks
10.0 pts
Grammar, Punctuation, Spelling
5.0 to >4.5 pts
Proficient
The paper is mostly free of errors in grammar, punctuation and
spelling.

6. 4.5 to >4.0 pts
Competent
Very few errors in grammar, punctuation and spelling. The
errors are minor and do not detract from the work.
4.0 to >3.5 pts
Marginal
Errors in grammar, punctuation and spelling cause distraction
when reading the paper.
3.5 to >0.0 pts
Weak
Numerous errors in grammar, punctuation and spelling
throughout the assignment detract from the paper.
0.0 pts
No Marks
5.0 pts
APA Style
5.0 to >4.5 pts
Proficient
Written work was formatted using APA standards. Properly
cited scholarly sources using APA style to credit when
paraphrasing or quoting. Correctly and completely listed cited
works in APA-style References List.
4.5 to >4.0 pts
Competent
Within the body of the paper, there are some errors in use of
APA formatting. Some errors or omissions in use or formatting
of citations or References List.
4.0 to >3.5 pts
Marginal
Multiple errors in APA formatting throughout the paper. Did not
adequately cite references or failed to use APA-style citations
and References list.
3.5 to >0.0 pts
Weak
Did not demonstrate an effort to use APA style in the paper.

7. Failed to use or properly format citations where needed or made
omissions or errors in References List.
0.0 pts
No Marks
5.0 pts
Total Points: 100.0