Whose CSI Is It Anyway?
Tell me, what's on your mind, Mr. Dealer?
Dealers have been taking a beating on these Customer Satisfaction Index scores ever since they were introduced by the manufacturers. I think they should take the product out of the survey and make a separate dealer survey. We have too many customers who have product problems during their first ninety days of ownership and, no matter how hard we try, they end up taking it out on the dealer. What are the manufacturers trying to hide? We sure have nothing to hide as dealers.
So your beef is that dealers get unfairly marked down much of the time due to product problems as opposed to customers' problems with dealerships?
Yes. I would say that the percentage is up there around 90%, when they send a bad survey back to the manufacturer, they have taken the product problems out on the dealer. I have a lot of people who say, "You guys treated us fairly. Can we re-do the survey or can we write another survey to the manufacturer and let them know that you guys are good and that we had problems with the car?" It is time for the manufacturer to get a grade too. If dealers are getting a grade, why not have the manufacturers get a grade? What are they trying to hide?
Why do you think they do it this way?
They keep pushing their problems down on us. Chrysler has the Five Star program and now Ford has their Blue Oval program. Both are just clubs to beat us with. Now, like Chrysler's Five Star program, if you are not up there within a certain category, you can't become a five star dealer.
The fact that some dealers can and others can't, doesn't that mean that the opportunity is there? It's not likely that one dealer has more problem automobiles than another, is it?
I think you are wrong on that. I've got eight franchises and I think some of them have more problems in the first ninety days and some don't.
If you are comparing same make to same make, isn't it likely that they will have the same percentage of problem cars? Doesn't it all even out between dealers?
That's not the point. The point is, why should the judgment of my ability to handle my customers include dissatisfaction with the product?
In your opinion, what advantage is there for a manufacturer to do it this way?
This takes the heat away from their production, manufacturing and product problems and directs that heat to the dealer, not just on a case by case basis, but across the country. When people, the media, etc., see that dealers can't get this score or can't get that score, they start to think, "Well, that's the dealers for you." Most of the time, it is the manufacturer's problems that the customers are upset about. It is time for us to see their grades. I would like to see their grade, that's all I'm asking. It's wrong because of the fact that the customer naturally ties the product to the dealership. People buy a car from a car dealer and a lot of people think that the car dealer is responsible for the product, when in reality, all the dealer does is deliver and service the product. If a new vehicle accidentally fails in the first thirty to sixty or ninety days, many customers believe that it is the dealers' responsibility. We get a grade, why don't we see the manufacturer's grade?
I'm a Honda dealer. I promise you if Honda did this exact formula that I am asking for, I think that Honda would rate very, very high.
Because they produce quality products?
Right. I think Nissan would rate very, very high. Then we can do away with all of these evaluations we are doing with J. D. Powers on what dealers think of their manufacturers. I'm totally convinced that I have some franchises whose products would rate very, very high and then I have some franchises whose products would rate very, very low on customer satisfaction. Being in the business as long as I have been, I can tell when people come back and buy a car. If they are really satisfied with the product, they will usually come back and buy a car from me. But if they have had a few quirks with the product, they don't rate me high on CSI. Whether you have a service survey or a sales survey, they are still going to rate me low because their vehicle broke. An average car today is $22,000.00. If that car breaks down within sixty days and they get a warranty survey from the manufacturer on it, they are mad. They are going to be pissed off because of the fact that their car broke down and it shouldn't have broken down.
Do you think that the manufacturers had good intentions when they started CSI/QPC survey programs?
Actually, I think it is a really good program. Customer's expectations are pretty high when they come in here and they are high when they leave. Why would they buy a car here if they were being treated badly? Would you buy a car somewhere if you were being treated badly? They have product and dealership separated on the survey. If you look at these manufacturers' surveys, and you have to really pay attention to them, they will ask the question, "What is the product, how do you rate your product?" Then you can put your happy faces or whatever. They need to just take that completely out and send a separate survey just on the manufacturers and their products.
Makes sense. If they didn't love that car, they wouldn't have bought it. There is no logic in buying a brand new car. People buy a new car on emotion. If they bought logically, you would never sell a new car. They love that new car. They are not going to blame the car. And they don't think to blame the manufacturer.
That's right.
In the long run, who is it that really gets hurt by this being done this way?
Ultimately, it is the consumer who suffers. What is happening is that the dealer can only do so much to improve how they handle the defective product, but the real source of the problem, 90% of the time, is defective product. It is the consumer who is bearing the brunt of this because the manufacturers aren't surveying themselves. Nobody is surveying the manufacturers to point out to them where they need to improve. That's why I don't believe in that JD Powers survey that they send us, the NADA dealer satisfaction survey "How do you rate the manufacturer?" There is really no value in that.
I think that survey does have value. It's my opinion that it does mean something to the manufacturers. Can you give me a little more detail on how you would envision a "manufacturer" customer survey working?
The manufacturer sends a survey based strictly on what the customer thinks of the product and what kind of improvement the manufacturer can make on the product. Get more feed- back on design, performance, fuel mileage, whatever has got to do with the vehicle. This would also help them build cars based on what the public wants.
Could you not do your own survey of your customers?
I suppose I could. You would have to have somebody administer it, and that can get very expensive.
Why couldn't NADA, at least in some target areas, do some surveying of their own of the same people and be able to say, "Well, this dealer got this CSI score, but actually, 90% of their negative responses were directly related to product." I know it sounds like fighting fire with fire, but maybe that's what is needed.
That might be a way to get the manufacturers to wake up. The manufacturers just needs to stand up and take their share of the blame.
What would be the self-serving reasons why the manufacturers would expose themselves this way? In the long run, are there real benefits if they graded themselves that way?
They can do the same thing that I am going to do and that's concentrate on my core business. They can concentrate on their core business. Everybody has a track record and it is easy to measure as long as the measuring is done fairly. I think with the system they have now, the measuring is not done fairly. It is not advantageous to anybody at this point. The only way that they are going to make it an advantage to correct the problems is to take a look at themselves. Just like I'm not afraid to take a look at myself. If you get bad Customer Satisfaction Index scores, you soon start talking about them and have meetings with your salesmen and your mechanics on their surveys and try to improve. When the factories start talking about their product problems, maybe they can open up their eyes to see exactly where they are messing up at the factory level.
The act of measuring a process, will by itself, improve the process. It sounds to me like the manufacturers are kind of like the teachers' union. They make their living teaching, testing, grading and promoting, yet they don't want to be graded themselves.
Everybody should get their own grade; not a combined grade. I am now being measured with the product. I don't think it is fair for me to be measured with the product. I take full responsibility for what I am doing, but I would like to manufacturer to take full responsibility for what they are producing.
I'm with you.
