| |
|
 |
| |
Dealer/Manufacturer Relations on the way up
For the past 14 years, the Canadian Automobile Dealers Association (CADA) has been surveying dealers across Canada and providing results to manufacturers and dealers. The 2002 Dealer Satisfaction Index Survey Results (DSI) was captioned, 'Dealer/Manufacturer Relations on the way up'. In an environment where doom and gloom prevails, where almost every article you read provides you with only negatives, the industry as a whole was proud of the results reflective of positive dealer/manufacturer relations.
The DSI Survey summaries comprehensive data on dealer's opinions of their respective manufacturer's performance in many wide-ranging aspects of its (manufacturers) operations. The survey also establishes dealers' priorities with respect to a number of pertinent issues and presents results associated with specific geographical regions (i.e. Atlantic, Central or Western and market type, i.e. metro, urban or rural.' Because the questions are tabulated on a '20 to a + 20 standard to reflect dealer responses of strongly disagree (-20), disagree (-10), undecided (0) agree (+10) and strongly agree (+20), I caught myself having to go back to basics and interpret the findings accordingly.
This survey is not about product quality but about processes that impact the relationship between dealers and manufacturers. It is a report card on how the manufacturer is viewed by its dealers and what should, could, or must improve. As an example, one question reads 'warranty policies and procedures of my franchisor allow my dealership to operate efficiently'. The results reported only one manufacturer rated below '0' an industry level of 7.30, with 14 manufacturers above the 7.30 level and 9 below. So, in layman's terms, do the policies allow the dealership to operate efficiently' On average, most certainly, as reflected by applying the -20 to the +20 standards to the survey results.
Another question 'vehicles I get from my franchisor are designed to meet the demands of the marketplace' The industry mean reported was 9.75 with 17 above this level and 7 below. In this case no manufacturer was rated with a minus. How do I interpret this? I say that dealers are attempting to influence the automobiles produced, to positively impact the sale ability of the product in a very competitive environment, but that on average none of the responses disagreed with the statement that the vehicles I get from my manufacturers are designed to meet the demands of the market place.
And the last example,' vehicles I have received most recently are manufactured well'.
Again the industry mean was 13.9 with 14 above this level and 10 below with the lowest ranking being 6.82. Does this imply that manufacturers rated below the industry's mid point provide product, which is poorly manufactured; or that there is room for improvement' Again on average and based on an application of the interpretative standard there is no disagreement with that statement.
In a recent article in the Wheels section, the survey findings were completely misrepresented. The interpretation was so far in left field that the ignorance of the columnist clearly manifested itself. However, this alone did not draw my attention to this columnist. What did, was the fact he quoted that the survey results were 'for dealers review only'', not for press release''., strict copyright enforcement' and implied that the industry was in a 'Watergate' type of cover-up and it angered me immensely. I'm not sure what made me more upset- his arrogance or his ignorance. Industry data like that contained in the DSI Survey is frequently misrepresented and the Wheels column of 2 weeks ago was a good example of this.
The automotive industry has nothing to hide. In fact all the positives, all the good things that are part of this great industry speak volumes to the honesty and integrity of its members. The reason I am upset by this article in the wheels section and thought it was important to write about it this week was because the reporter clearly did not understand the method of reporting on the survey findings.
It is possible that this reporter did not know how to interpret the survey results' Maybe, but highly unlikely, especially since the copy containing the results also explains the standard for interpreting them.
The role dealers' play in the larger picture is a very difficult one. On the one hand they are entrusted with the tools to market and remarket products produced for their market. But on the other hand they must do all of this within very strict parameters. This independent survey facilitates the collection of information with assurance that this information was not going to be broadcast and was intended to be shared with the manufacturers.
Now, with this thought taken away, dealers will be reluctant to respond to the annual survey. Without a representative response rate, the survey will be of no value and potentially sabotage the process.
If the integrity of the process and rules associated with it are not respected, dealers will be discouraged to respond and over a period of time negate any goodwill created by this process.
Until next week, PLEASE DRIVE SAFELY!
|
|
|
 |
|
|
| |
 |
|
Home Page
