You've delivered complex, global programs ahead of schedule and under budget while leading large, diverse teams. When leaders are under pressure and trade-offs feel unavoidable, what does personal excellence actually look like in practice on the toughest days?

Tracy Mack-Askew

Personal excellence is tested most clearly when things don't go as planned. I experienced that firsthand during a significant quality issue in the field. The team moved quickly and implemented a containment, but it wasn't effective. We had to pause, acknowledge the miss, and accept that there was real egg on our face.

On the toughest days, excellence means resisting the instinct to defend a weak solution just to protect timelines or reputations. I was very direct with the team: we needed a no-kidding, robust solution; one that would never disappoint the field again. That required courage on both sides. The team had to be honest that developing a durable long-term fix would take more time, even knowing the commercial implications.

We made the difficult decision to stop delivering trucks to customers, fully aware of the significant revenue impact. At the same time, I pushed the team hard to develop a viable short-term solution so we could continue selling trucks while the long-term fix was underway. Initially, that meant one to three hours of offline rework per truck — painful for our plants.

What ultimately made the difference was collective ownership. Engineering, manufacturing, and quality worked together relentlessly until the solution could be executed in-station within takt time. We were able to resume deliveries while protecting customers and restoring trust in the field. That's what personal excellence looks like under pressure: caring deeply about people, wearing the organizational hat when it matters most, and holding the line on standards while supporting teams through the hard work.

In an industry facing constant disruption and accelerating change, what have you learned about motivating teams and sustaining performance when certainty is limited but expectations remain high?

Tracy Mack-Askew

In environments of constant disruption, I've learned that motivation doesn't come from comfort or certainty; it comes from knowing your leader will continue to invest in you while still holding the organization to a high standard.

When pressure rises, many leaders pull back on development and connection. I've learned that's exactly when people need it most. As uncertainty increases, budgets often shrink, and leadership training or team-building is usually the first thing to go. I make very deliberate choices not to let that happen. I continue to pour into my teams, even when it requires creativity rather than cash.

If traditional programs or large events aren't possible, we adapt. Instead of golf outings, we host simple picnics where everyone brings a dish, my budget covers the basics, and I'm the one cooking the meat. The point isn't the event itself — it's the signal. People and connection still matter, even when resources are constrained.

We also get creative in how we operate. We use technology to virtually support plant builds, reducing cost without reducing presence. And when pressure is high, I intentionally increase listening and communication. Leaders have a responsibility to guide the narrative, not allow uncertainty to fill the gaps with speculation or fear.

I rely on a culture team to keep a steady pulse on the organization; surfacing concerns, testing assumptions, and helping translate leadership context back to teams so decisions are understood, not just felt. Even amid sustained uncertainty, our engagement indicators remained strong, reinforcing that investing in people while holding the bar builds resilience, not entitlement.

What I've learned is simple: people can handle change, pressure, and ambiguity when they feel valued, heard, and supported — and when they see their leaders making the same level of commitment they're asking of their teams.

You're a strong advocate for collaborative and inclusive leadership. Can you share an example of how collaboration across disciplines or perspectives directly led to a stronger product or business outcome?

Tracy Mack-Askew

One clear example comes from our complexity and cost-reduction work. We deliberately evaluate ideas through cross-functional collaboration — engineering, purchasing, finance, and critically, sales — because a solution that looks excellent on paper can fail in the marketplace.

In one case, a highly aggressive proposal promised significant cost savings and had strong momentum behind it. From a purely functional perspective, we could have moved quickly — and many organizations would have. However, sales raised concerns early that the approach would likely undermine customer acceptance. Had we pushed forward without that challenge, we might have delivered short-term financial results, but at the expense of customer trust and long-term brand credibility.

Instead, we slowed the decision just enough to do it right. By bringing the right voices into the discussion early, the team reshaped the proposal into an approach that preserved the customer experience while still delivering meaningful financial value. The decision wasn't easier, but it was better; and far more durable for the business.

Inclusive leadership doesn't slow decisions; it prevents expensive mistakes from being made at scale.