Tesla vet says that ‘reviewing real products' — not mockups — is the key to staying innovative
How did it get there? With a little help from a Tesla veteran.
GM board member Jon McNeil was president of Tesla during the development and introduction of the Model 3, a crucial period of the company's growth. One of the things he credits for Tesla's success is how Elon Musk ran product meetings.
'No slides was our first rule,' McNeil told the audience earlier this month at TC All Stage in Boston. 'You have to be reviewing real product.'
Every week, senior leadership would sit down with product leaders to review their progress. The practice was inspired by an encounter Musk had with Steve Jobs, McNeil said.
'There was this belief that I think is true: Steve Jobs didn't have a ton of time or patience for Elon in the early days. And early in the early days, Elon would try to chase Steve down at events and parties in Silicon Valley for advice. And Steve didn't like Elon, and so would often turn his back to him when he approached him.
'But one night, Elon got lucky and said, 'Steve, if you had one piece of advice for me as a young entrepreneur' — he had just just done PayPal and was joining the team at Tesla — 'what would that be?' Steve said, 'Elon, you're now in the hardware business, but the hardware business is a lot like the software business. If you want to be successful in business, you have to get one thing right, and that is, you have to have a perfect product. And if the product is beautiful, it will sell itself.'
Musk took that to heart, McNeil said, and the concept of a perfect product became central to product development at Tesla.
'The thing we were looking for first of all was surprise and delight. Like, are we doing something that is going to just make somebody go wow or laugh or have fun?
'Crazy example of that is the fart button,' McNeil said, referring to a software button labeled 'Emissions Testing Mode' that would simulate flatulence through the car's speakers.
The company also prized minimalism, which on the software side meant keeping functions accessible in fewer than two taps on the screen.
'It has to be a kind of a no brainer for the average user. Then we would double back the designer — the lead designer was always in the room — and then we would say, OK, Franz, now make it beautiful.'
Meetings like those, where the actual product was reviewed, not a mockup, helped preserve Tesla's culture as it grew, McNeil said. 'You can imagine the culture that gets communicated when people are bringing their A game to the CEO every week. Because you're not going to bring your B game to the CEO — especially that CEO, because he's going to fire you,' he said.
'That keeps that company on a one-week cadence of innovation. Every week they're making progress because of the product reviews.'
McNeil left Tesla in early 2018. In 2022, he was added to the board at GM.
'One of the things I'm most proud of is Mary Barra, CEO, and Mark Reuss, president, [who oversee] a 275,000 person, $200 billion revenue company, are running product reviews every week where there's no slides. You've got to see the real product [whether it's] hardware, software. If it's hardware, it's in the room. You're touching it. You're feeling it,' he said.
'That stuff is so powerful. And it's led to GMs introduction of 17 EVs, now the second best selling EVs in the country. Because they're just on product, every week.'

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Business Insider
a minute ago
- Business Insider
Tesla must pay over $242M in damages after being found partly at fault for deadly Autopilot crash
In a major blow to Tesla, a Florida federal jury on Friday found Elon Musk's electric car company partly to blame for a 2019 crash that left a 22-year-old woman dead and her boyfriend seriously injured. The jury sided with the plaintiffs, awarding the family of Naibel Benavides Leon and her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo, a combined $329 million in total damages — $129 million in compensatory damages and $200 million punitive damages. Jurors awarded $59 million in compensatory damages to Benavides Leon's family and $70 million to Angulo, who suffered a traumatic brain injury and broken bones among other injuries. The verdict marks a substantial setback for Tesla and its Autopilot driver-assistance feature that the attorneys for the plaintiffs said was engaged at the time of the deadly collision and had design flaws. Tesla, in a statement, called the verdict "wrong" and said it plans to appeal "given the substantial errors of law and irregularities at trial." "Today's verdict is wrong and only works to set back automotive safety and jeopardize Tesla's and the entire industry's efforts to develop and implement life-saving technology," said Tesla. The company added, "This was never about Autopilot; it was a fiction concocted by plaintiffs' lawyers blaming the car when the driver — from day one — admitted and accepted responsibility." Please help BI improve our Business, Tech, and Innovation coverage by sharing a bit about your role — it will help us tailor content that matters most to people like you. Continue By providing this information, you agree that Business Insider may use this data to improve your site experience and for targeted advertising. By continuing you agree that you accept the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy . The plaintiff's attorney, Brett Schreiber, said the verdict "represents justice for Naibel's tragic death and Dillon's lifelong injuries, holding Tesla and Musk accountable for propping up the company's trillion-dollar valuation with self-driving hype at the expense of human lives." The verdict follows a three-week civil trial that included testimony from Angulo, Benavides Leon's family members, and the driver of the Tesla that plowed into a parked SUV and struck the couple as they were stargazing outside the vehicle alongside a Key Largo road. The jury found Tesla 33% responsible for the crash, with the driver responsible for the rest. Tesla will have to pay the full punitive damages amount, and a third of the compensatory damages, which equals $42.5 million. The case stems from a wrongful-death lawsuit that the plaintiffs brought against Tesla. The lawsuit argued that the carmaker's vehicles were "defective and unsafe for their intended use." Tesla, the lawsuit said, programmed Autopilot"to allow it to be used on roadways that Tesla knew were not suitable for its use and knew this would result in collisions causing injuries and deaths of innocent people who did not choose to be a part of Tesla's experiments, such as Plaintiffs." "Despite knowing of Autopilot's deficiencies, Tesla advertised Autopilot in a way that greatly exaggerated its capabilities and hid its deficiencies," said the lawsuit, which pointed to multiple comments from Musk touting the safety and reliability of the software. Tesla driver George McGee had Autopilot on when his 2019 Model S blew past a stop sign and a flashing red light at a three-way intersection and plowed into Angulo's mother's Chevrolet Tahoe at more than 60-miles-per-hour, the lawsuit said. McGee — who previously settled a separate lawsuit with the plaintiffs for an undisclosed amount — said he had dropped his cellphone during a call and bent down to pick it up moments before his Tesla, without warning, T-boned the Tahoe. He testified during the trial that he thought of Autopilot, which allows the vehicle to steer itself, switch lanes, brake, and accelerate on its own, as a "copilot." "My concept was it would assist me should I have a failure" or "should I make a mistake," McGee said in testimony, adding, "I do feel like it failed me." "I believe it didn't warn me of the car and the individuals and nor did it apply brakes," McGee testified. Attorneys for Tesla have argued that McGee was solely responsible for the April 25, 2019, crash. In the trial's opening statements, Tesla attorney Joel Smith said the case was about a driver, not a "defective vehicle," and had "nothing to do with Autopilot." "It's about an aggressive driver, not a complacent driver, a distracted driver who was fumbling around for his cellphone," Smith said. "It's about a driver pressing an accelerator pedal and driving straight through an intersection." Tesla's attorneys said that just before the crash, McGee hit the accelerator, overriding the vehicle's set cruising speed of 45 miles per hour and its ability to brake on its own. Autopilot mode, Tesla says on its website, is "intended for use with a fully attentive driver, who has their hands on the wheel and is prepared to take over at any moment."

13 minutes ago
Jury orders Tesla to pay more than $200 million in Autopilot crash case
MIAMI -- A Miami jury decided that Elon Musk's car company Tesla was partly responsible for a deadly crash in Florida involving its Autopilot driver assist technology and must pay the victims more than $200 million in punitive damages. The federal jury held that Tesla bore significant responsibility because its technology failed and that not all the blame can be put on a reckless driver, even one who admitted he was distracted by his cell phone before hitting a young couple out gazing at the stars. The decision comes as Musk seeks to convince Americans his cars are safe enough to drive on their own as he plans to roll out a driverless taxi service in several cities in the coming months. The decision ends a four-year long case remarkable not just in its outcome but that it even made it to trial. Many similar cases against Tesla have been dismissed and, when that didn't happen, settled by the company to avoid the spotlight of a trial. 'This will open the floodgates,' said Miguel Custodio, a car crash lawyer not involved in the Tesla case. 'It will embolden a lot of people to come to court.' The case also included startling charges by lawyers for the family of the deceased, 22-year-old, Naibel Benavides Leon, and for her injured boyfriend, Dillon Angulo. They claimed Tesla either hid or lost key evidence, including data and video recorded seconds before the accident. Tesla has previously faced criticism that it is slow to cough up crucial data by relatives of other victims in Tesla crashes, accusations that the car company has denied. In this case, the plaintiffs showed Tesla had the evidence all along, despite its repeated denials, by hiring a forensic data expert who dug it up. Tesla said it made a mistake after being shown the evidence and honestly hadn't thought it was there. 'Today's verdict is wrong," Tesla said in a statement, 'and only works to set back automotive safety and jeopardize Tesla's and the entire industry's efforts to develop and implement life-saving technology,' They said the plaintiffs concocted a story 'blaming the car when the driver – from day one – admitted and accepted responsibility.' In addition to the punitive award, the jury said Tesla must also pay $49 million in compensatory damages, bringing the total borne by the company to $249 million. 'It's a big number that will send shockwaves to others in the industry,' said financial analyst Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities. 'It's not a good day for Tesla.' Tesla said it will appeal. It's not clear how much of a hit to Tesla's reputation for safety the verdict in the Miami case will make. Tesla has vastly improved its technology since the crash on a dark, rural road in Key Largo, Florida, in 2019. But the issue of trust generally in the company came up several times in the case, including in closing arguments Thursday. The plaintiffs' lead lawyer, Brett Schreiber, said Tesla's decision to even use the term Autopilot showed it was willing to mislead people and take big risks with their lives because the system only helps drivers with lane changes, slowing a car and other tasks, falling far short of driving the car itself. Schreiber said other automakers use terms like 'driver assist' and 'copilot' to make sure drivers don't rely too much on the technology. 'Words matter,' Schreiber said. 'And if someone is playing fast and lose with words, they're playing fast and lose with information and facts.' Schreiber acknowledged that the driver, George McGee, was negligent when he blew through flashing lights, a stop sign and a T-intersection at 62 miles an hour before slamming into a Chevrolet Tahoe that the couple had parked to get a look at the stars. The Tahoe spun around so hard it was able to launch Benavides 75 feet through the air into nearby woods where her body was later found. It also left Angulo, who walked into the courtroom Friday with a limp and cushion to sit on, with broken bones and a traumatic brain injury. But Schreiber said Tesla was at fault nonetheless. He said Tesla allowed drivers to act recklessly by not disengaging the Autopilot as soon as they begin to show signs of distraction and by allowing them to use the system on smaller roads that it was not designed for, like the one McGee was driving on. 'I trusted the technology too much,' said McGee at one point in his testimony. 'I believed that if the car saw something in front of it, it would provide a warning and apply the brakes.' The lead defense lawyer in the Miami case, Joel Smith, countered that Tesla warns drivers that they must keep their eyes on the road and hands on the wheel yet McGee chose not to do that while he looked for a dropped cell phone, adding to the danger by speeding. Noting that McGee had gone through the same intersection 30 or 40 times previously and hadn't crashed during any of those trips, Smith said that this isolates the cause to one thing alone: 'The cause is that he dropped his cell phone.' The auto industry has been watching the case closely because a finding of Tesla liability despite a driver's admission of reckless behavior would pose significant legal risks for every company as they develop cars that increasingly drive themselves.
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
S&P 500 Falls 1.5%, Nasdaq Tumbles 2% Dow Drops 500 Points on weak jobs and Trump tariffs
Aug 1 - U.S. stocks fell sharply Friday morning as a disappointing July jobs report and President Donald Trump's updated tariffs rattled investors. The Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 583 points, or 1.3%, while the S&P 500 fell 1.5% and the Nasdaq Composite slid nearly 2%. Warning! GuruFocus has detected 2 Warning Signs with FLTLF. The Labor Department reported just 73,000 new nonfarm payrolls in July, far below economists' forecasts for 100,000. Prior months were revised significantly lower, highlighting ongoing labor market weakness. Traders now see a 66% chance of a September Federal Reserve rate cut, up from earlier in the week. Tariff news added pressure. The White House announced levies of 10% to 41% on select imports, including a 35% rate on goods from Canada, up from 25%. Items routed through third countries to avoid duties will face a 40% charge. Tech and bank stocks were the worst in dragging down the market. JPMorgan Chase (NYSE:JPM) declined by 4%, and Bank of America (NYSE:BAC) and Wells Fargo (NYSE:WFC) dropped by more than 3%. Amazon (NASDAQ:AMZN) was down over 7% on weaker than hoped-for directions, and Nvidia (NASDAQ:NVDA), Meta Platforms (NASDAQ:META), and Alphabet (NASDAQ:GOOGL) were falling, too. Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL) was an exception to the downward move when it gained 2 percent after it reported good earnings. This article first appeared on GuruFocus.