Is this why ADP does what ADP does?

[texaslp]

I could write a novel but I'll try to keep it brief and hit on just a few points.

ADP is good but not perfect, and there HAVE been improvements over the last 20yrs. Every renewal term I've looked at others and haven't found one better. Or at least not enough to justify the hassle and upfront cost of switching.

Yes you have to lock in to a 5yr contract. OTOH, even if not locked, are you going to spend 100k or more upfront and walk away in less than years?

How many new innovations have you seen ADP come out with that the dealership personnel won't use. Nah, that's okay, I like the old way.

The question about how many keystrokes are involved reminds me of DP's who have never touched a computer. "I need this complicated, filtered report for a specific time-frame that I've never asked for before, can't you just press a button and the computer will spit it out." There is no magic button.

[This message has been edited by texaslp (edited 08-06-2009).]

[gmcgrew]

Jay I understand your frustration with the new DMS and why you are attempting to "improve" the software. Many of the GM users on the forum have done the same with Snap-On for the new GM catalog. Many of the shortcuts that we were able to use to speed up the process and the general speed of the old catalog were gone when we were forced to change catalogs. Snap-On worked on improving the catalog in the ways that they could but in my opinion it is still not as parts-user friendly as the old catalog. Unfortunately with the platform they are using for the software it is as good as it gets. It's not that they don't see the issues with the software that we have pointed out or that they don't want to change it, the fact is that they are unable to change it because of the platform it was built on. ADP has never come out and said the same thing but I believe part of the lack of progress is this same issue, the platform the software was designed with is inhibitive to changes and some of the other changes that you want are differences of philosophy and will never be changed the way you want them. I have found ADP to be receptive of ideas on this forum and they have used the feedback from people on this forum to improve their product.

Because I feel ADP reads the forum and may be able to improve the DMS I will state what I feel is the most glaring weakness of the DMS. The stock order criteria is built around monthly orders, in todays business climate we need to be able to set the criteria to look at daily data. If I sell a part today and sell the same part in a few days the system will see one month's sale data. While we have 2 distinct hits and possbily need to stock these parts, especially if they are seasonal parts. We need to have the flexability to quickly add and subtract parts without waiting for months to go by in which we may have already missed our opportunity. With a positive change in this area that would allow the dealers to make more money with less inventory a DMS could rule the marketplace. Are there other areas that need tweaked to be more user friendly. Absolutely. But in my opinion they are minor compared to better parts availability. Saving some keystrokes and movement of parts will save 5-10 minutes in a counterperson's day, having the part on hand will save the customer days and the technician hours that they don't have to spend restaging cars.

[Gerry Laughlin]

gmc,
I agree with the statements concerning the help that Dale and Matt put out, I believe they both care deeply about their product and I do appreciate their dedication. Past them I have my doubts. I believe (as I have said before) upper levels of management are complacent and that eventually it will catch up with them, just as it did with some of the auto manufacturers. Guys that know me know I used to be ADP's biggest fan, but that was a long time ago. Back then I used to put in PCR's, went to user meetings, I learned Dealer programming and tried to help make it a better product. I do believe that 20 years ago there was a can do attitude, these days it seems more like a why should I attitude. To me ADP has slapped an unstable web based GUI in front of their old system and tried to pass it off as new. I also agree with you about changes that would assist in stocking. But once again I go back to the changes that were instituted when RIM came in. We complained about how the changes were handled in ADP, what were we told? That this was how GM wanted it, well I didn't know GM was paying for their system, I thought we were, so maybe we should have had a say. There are changes that are relatively simple that could be made that would vastly improve the system, but ADP will not listen. The main one being the stocking changes you talked about. One that would really make a difference to me is more user fields. For goodness sake we have Comment and Misc, every other file in the system has user fields why not parts? How about a GM-Delco-Durastop cross-ref file? Geez give me an excel file and 2 days, Ill write the freakin program, why cant they. Same with the Durapack program.
Well this is turning into a rant, which I have tried to avoid, so goodnight.
Gerry

[gmcgrew]

Gerry a funny story about a previous employeer I had. It was a software company and they were pitching their services to a company. When confronted with the fact that the purchasing people felt all of the companies they had looked at sucked the come back was yeah but "we suck less". Unfortunately that is how I am starting to feel about all of the DMS companies and the standards that we hold them to. The software company I was working for reminds me of Chrysler. They have been purchased several times and the company taking them over always takes the portion they really want and resells the rest to someone else.

I am not sure how to do it or what really needs done but it seems like the large companies (GM, Chrysler, Toyota, R&R, ADP, etc.) need to be held accountable by their customers. We are held accountable everyday by our customers but because we sign such long contracts and the competing businesses are in the "we suck less" model we don't have the ability to hold our suppliers accountable.

[This message has been edited by gmcgrew (edited 08-06-2009).]

[This message has been edited by gmcgrew (edited 08-06-2009).]

[cantfind122]

Gerry,gmcrew and Jay

All good points and great discussion. I think there needs to be some objective synopsizing (with examples for all involved) including those reading on the "downlow." All DMS'have their highs and lows. Some higher some lower depending on the application and how it is used. For example parts people often go back to the advanced elite version for several reasons two of which are parts catalog interface and the ability to hammer in part numbers without locking the screen because of type ahead slowdowns. Service (depending on the user) usually thinks WebSuite (Drive) is cool for some of the trick stuff it can do. F&I and Sales go back and forth but slick looking screens are always a good deversion for curious customers. Is it beneficial to be able to change labor rates or parts pricing for an entire ticket on the fly or know if there is an unpaid RO across logons? You tell me. It's all a crap shoot and some folks (including myself) like the rawness of functionality over the automation of click and wonder why it happened. Comparitvly, in a grocery store I personally like having the cashier count my change back because it gives me a sense they understand the logic and could make adjustments if/when thier machine is incorrect. But volumn is the current business acumen and the tools are made to accomodate that fact. Of course, this has created new dymanics such as built in apathy, multiple tiers of accesabilty and plauible deniablity. Geez, I think there is a Tom Clancy book here somewhere.

[Jay Daniels]

Ladies and Gentlemen:

GMcGrew: It is good to see that you recognize that ADP has a number opportunities still open for improvement. As I see it, getting the D.P. or whomever is ultimately responsible in the decision making process for the DMS understands there are issues that should be addressed.

This evening /tonight/this moring my wife and I have been engaged in a spirited dialog regarding the relative merits of software products. I may have mentioned that my wife is a business analyst for a major software provider for the energy sector. She agrees with my belief the software provider should listen to the concerns of the client and address those concerns. It is my thought that ADP does not share that opinion.

It has been my experience that it is less expensive to retain a client that to attract a new one.

Sorry to have been so long posting but my life is quite complicated.


------------------
It is a good thing when seeking perfection to learn to accept excellence as a suitable alternative. It is not a good thing when seeking excellence to accept mediocrity as a substitute.

Do not hesitate to expect of others what others expect of you (excellence).

[This message has been edited by Jay Daniels (edited 08-15-2009).]