Last month, Harvard Business School set off the debate about a name change for GM. It suggested going for an American theme, although somehow I don't think Stars and Stripes Automobile Manufacturing Co. is going to cut it in a global market.

But a name change might be necessary. "If the goal is to try and put this company on a massive diet and just turn it into a smaller car manufacturing operation, I'm not sure there'd be that much harm in rebranding...The brand isn't in good shape so they have little to lose," Jean-Pierre Dube, a University of Chicago marketing professor told Associated Press reporter Emily Fredrix.

But would a name change help? Has Philip Morris cigarettes become any more acceptable since the company changed its name to Altria? And will Blackwater ever fix its appalling reputation after changing its name to Xe? GM didn't go bust because of its name.

I would have to agree with Detroit Free Press associate editor Ron Dzwonkowski who says a name change would just be distraction. The bottom line is the company needs to put all its energies into selling more cars. A name change would only have consumers debating the new name, and not focusing on the cars.

But then, GM has shown itself to be such a reactive company, formulating policies as a knee-jerk response, that it might just call in the marketing people for a name change.