rom the outset of his tenure as the chief executive of GE, Welch intended to create dynamic change in the organization, its systems, and its people.
He has been particularly candid, according to Pascale (1990), having once said that he was responsible for creating a morale problem at GE, but that he did so in order to reposition the company so that it could survive and become profitable on a global scale. O'Boyle (1998) believes that among Welch's strengths are his ability to function as a proactive a catalyst of change, his ruthless insistence of ending complacency in his organization, and his ability to anticipate events rather than merely react to them. At the same time, says O'Boyle (1998), Welch has overseen an organization that has constantly been in legal difficulties, accused in the courts and the press of cutting corners, deceiving stockholders and others, and engaging in practices that if not blatantly illegal, skate a narrow line between legality and illegality. As O'Boyle (1998) has commented, since nothing went on at GE that Welch did not know or at least tacitly approve, his inherent honesty may be in some doubt.
O'Boyle 1998) characterized Welch as domineering, immature, abrasive, and competitive to a fault but likeable at the same time during his early years with GE. Over time, Lowe (2001) claims that Welch's reputation for a brash version of candor became a part of his trademark image. More specifically, with respect to the leadership traits identified by Kouzes and Posner (1995), it is Welch's forward-looking orientation that outweighs his honesty.
...