Carlos Ghosn is a tough talker who follows through. The new président–directeur général of Renault, the man who turned around its Nissan unit, said last February that the French automaker can do better. Half its profits come from France, 80 per cent from Europe, and half from a single car line, the Mégane.
   I own a Mégane, and have been happy with the quality, styling and the reliability—but VP Patrick Pélata, who was with Ghosn at Nissan, reckons that the designs have been too idiosyncratic, too anti-customer. Consequently, Renault is in need of a brand image, says Ghosn; by focusing on the traditional segments it has not managed to innovate into the niches.
   Renault does need fixing, because if it is to be a global player, it needs to think less like a France-only firm. But this road of pleasing customers is fraught with dangers.
   The last time Renault went on about creating a car for the customer, rather than taking risks and advancing things for the customer’s lifestyle, we got the 9 and 11. These two models, sold as the Alliance and Encore through AMC dealers in North America, were two of the dullest vehicles that came from the régie. For customer clinics are to be taken with a grain of salt, and even if Twingo II has not done well in them, it need not mean a wholesale change.
   By all means be customer-centric, but not to the extent where progress is prevented; the designer sees a bigger picture including what customers may want. In fact, we say we want better gas mileage, maybe even a car that does away with fossil fuels altogether. We say we want a car that is environmentally friendly (Renault does have good environmental policies). Engage us in new ways that other car makers have failed to do. Take the lead on design and don’t let us hold you back, but address those big concerns that we consumers all share. Then we will flock to you.
   The Modus is not the cleverest car in the Opel Meriva class; the Mégane II does polarize opinions. But they have contributed to a brand that proclaims itself as the créateur d’automobiles, one that pioneers in an industry that often stifles. Individuality is a great trait to have in any brand, because a brand must differentiate. The image is secure, something for Renault to build upon.
   Say it pursues these niches. It should do so in a way that is very Renault, with individualistic cars. There is a way, as Ghosn and Pélata know from their time at Nissan, to achieve this goal without diluting a creative, innovative image. Nissan once made Bluebirds; now it makes Muranos.
   I am a fan of design director Patrick le Quément, even if there are veiled references to him by Pélata having taken Renault design in the wrong direction. He was one of the men who took Renault, if not all of Europe, out of its design rut; European cars have a desirability that wasn’t around when Renault was churning out the 11 and 19. Le Quément himself recognizes that the Mégane II’s daring isn’t everyone’s cup of tea; his Fluence concept car shows a more cohesive, flowing look, though it is a trifle plain, sort of an updated Floride. You can begin seeing its influences in the new Renault Clio, a new hit and another European Car of the Year winner for the firm.
   I would suggest that the thing wrong with the Mégane II is that it is not an elegant car. Elegance is what unites consumers; imbalance polarizes. The Ford Falcon EA169 always was right in the details but not as a whole car that could have benefited from a longer wheelbase.
   Renault needs to keep an eye on just what needs fixing. It is wise to do so while it is still in the black, and it does some things right. I say the brand is where it needs to be: a great place on which new, exciting products can be built to achieve M. Ghosn’s goals.

Del.icio.us tags: Renault Carlos Ghosn design brand Patrick le Quément Posted by Jack Yan, 05:15  permalink

comments

Post a Comment  Links to this post