Hunting for CSI getting out of hand

[Michael White]

Again tomv, you are missing the point. Granted, everyone knows what responsibility they have with our customers. Our 40% growth each year for the last 2.5 years did not come naturally. However, there are issues, and yes they can be regional, that the factory does have influence, or the general public does. If you are in a market where there are 5 GM stores and one is way below average. then yes, you are right. but tom, what if an entire area, like the San Francisco Bay area, home of 5 million poeple or so, why are the CSI's of this area much lower than most of the country?? If 25 out of 40 GM stores are significantly below average, something other than the dealership (but including them) is having influence. And again, the major manufacturers have a signifiacnt influence in CSI just by their policies. Case in point, many of our customers are reacting extremely negatively about being told their piston slap noise in thier trucks is normal and will not affect the operation of their vehicle. I do believe this is true. However, it will defintely affect the value of the vehicle when it is traded in. GM knows this, but does not want to spend the 5-10 billion dollars to fix it. A Toyota, Honda, etc, may have had a piston slap problem for 1 year, but they would not let it continue from 1999 to 2003. Many of the competing foreign car lines limit their CSI responses, some only wihin the first 12/12. GM may send out a CSI on a 94000 mile vehicle. Now at 94000 miles we do a recall, which generates a CSI, and the customer has to spend $2000 for other reapirs. Do you honestly believe this customer will be completely satisfied?? I think not.

I do accept full responsibility for my customer feelings about me and my company. But all I want is a system that can rate us honestly for what we do. Without having to "hunt" for CSI, many times this will not happen.
California is a foreign car state. Every Toyota store in the S.F Bay area sells more Camrys than all the combined GM stores sell Pontiacs. Most Mercedes and BMW stores sell more of their product than all the Cadillac dealerships combined. In the S.F Bay area. The influence of higher quality vehicles is more negatively affected here, than in the mid west, or Texas or the Florida market. What do you have to pay you car runners and lot attendents? In the Bay Area, it can cost upwares of $16 per hour plus $2000 per month in benefits. A friend of mine in the Arizona market hires hispanics to wash cars, run cars, etc, and pays them minimum wages with no benefits. Their labor rates are not that far below mine.

Again, there are regional influences, and factory influences that dealership groups have to face. One of the ways we have to is to work harder at the number game, because GM requires it. Then 5 dealers hunt for CSI, and GM praises them for ther efforts, and tells the other dealerships if they can do it, why can't you. Then 10 dealerships are hunting for CSi, leaving 10 dealers who are not, Then GM see those dealers and said the other 10 have improved their CSI, why can't you? Ths circle continues.

This had been a great discussion and I have enjoyed it. There is truths and realities in all the posts. Except it is not neccessarily a fair playing field. And to be honest, after all the talks , and analysis made, I do not have a solution to make it perfect or even significantly improved. Improved and more fair?? Yes. But not even close to being perfect. The posts ae not meant to slam GM in any way. GM should be proud of the improvements and efforts they are making in all of their product lines. But discussion is the only way for self improvement. And I have said enough

thanks for the discussion

[tomv]

youre correct...i am missing the point. no matter how hard i try i dont see what you have to pay lot attendants having anything to do with csi. i also believe the toyota and mercedes franchises in your area have to pay them similarly.
growth of 40% sounds like a migration from "higher quality" foreign makes to your franchise. i would expect that csi would benefit from this. they must be leaving previously owned vehicles to come to you for a reason.
as far as foreign manufacturers not letting perceived problems go on for many years... they do. somehow or another they manage to present it to the customer in a fashion that promotes acceptance as opposed to disatisfaction. hence...perceived quality.
i apologize but no matter how many times i read it all i see are excuses. trust me ive used enough of my own. i believe we have more control than we want to admit.
no matter how the system is weighted or balanced the same issues will come up. there will always be facilities who will manipulate the numbers and their customers to get what they need or want. the struggle will remain the same. we need to find a way to work within it.

[slilly01]

Hey Tom, the way you know whether these people are paid are influenced by CSI is to ask them and when they say, "NO.", then the assumption doesn't exist! Find one that's interested in the Factory being controlled by CSI or their pay too. They're most certainly interested in the dealerships having to worry about it and an Area Service Manager paid on their Market Area's dealerships' CSI, but none of their flaws are to questioned by a customer or anybody else.
The Only thing that they believe should be questioned is whether or not YOU can fix the problem and how the customer feels about that experience. I'm sorry Tom, maybe you believe the factory should remain cold and indifferent to problems and concerns. I don't.

[tomv]

on the contrary. i dont believe anyone should be cold or indifferent. i'm beginning to get a feel for that though.
i do believe the customer bases their csi scores on their dealership experience. i do believe that we ultimately control that experience and the customers perception of it.
my apologies...i havent interviewed enough gm employees to find out how they are affected by csi.

[robc]

Clearly I guess we've gone way past the debate issue. Whenever I get into these types of discussions I always think of standing aside and just see what comes out.

All I can think of is that I can guarantee that the best CSI store in country lost a customer last year. In fact, I bet they lost several. Nobody nobody is that much better than the majority of the rest. I know egos come into play and I have a healthy one too but when you go from store to store and you begin to see that the differences are thinner than youd think. There are the bottom dwellers sure, but they are few are far between. Everyone here is trying to not only the best they can, but also striving to increase their knowledge by just participating in the forums and I am thankful and optimistic by that.

My second thought and I hate to be blunt, but that I am glad someone has this CSI thing all solved. I am sure if we compared wed find that stores like Valley Cadillac, Bob Johnson, Dorschels, Doans, Patrick Pontiac, Ralph Pontiac, Piehler Pontiac, Dick Ide Pontiac all pale in comparison in the greater Rochester market. I mean I am just thinking by reading the past few years worth of CSI scores for the NE region that maybe, just maybe there is some room for growth for all of us.

------------------
** Rob, Editor Dealersedge/WD&S **
Help is only a message post away!
robc@dealersedge.com

[Robert a Bamert jr]

WOW, IN READING ALL THE POSTS ABOUT THIS TOPIC, IAM HAPPY TO BE A MEMBER OF THIS FORUM.
I HAVE ONLY BEEN WORKING FOR DEALERS NOW FOR 12YRS,BUT WHAT I HAVE LEARNED ON THE SERVICE SIDE OVER THE LAST FEW YRS IS THAT AFTER 3/36 THERE IS TO MUCH GRAY MATTER. CSI GETS STEPPED ON BUY US BEING TOLD TO SAY """"NO"""
AND THEN IN THE INTEREST OF CUSTOMER SATISFACTION GM SAYS """YES""" THATS SIMPLY WHAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED, IT MAKES US LOOK FOOLISH.TO MANY TIMES AS A SERVICE MANAGER IT WAS UNCLEAR WHAT THE RULES WERE TODAY,NEXT WEEK, NEXT MONTH. SET A STANDART AND STICK TO IT. LETS NOT OIL THE OLD SQUEAKY WHEEL AGAIN AFTER WE'VE SENT THEM REMINDERS WHEN WHEN IT NEEDS TO BE OILED.

[Venti]

I've read most of this thread. I find it the crowd that says, simply, "Give good service, and reap the rewards" to be completely disconnected from the environment I work in. This is not to say that they are wrong, but operating in a setting that I've long since forgotten existed.

My scenario is with SAAB, in Southern California. I operate two fixed operations in opposite ends of the county. In 2003, the dealership incentive money for CSI was roughly $250,000.00. In order to hit that number, you had to have CSI at or above 94%. In 2004, the objective is 95% and the reward is $350,000!

The carrot is placed there by the manufacturer. The incentives will not *ever* be ignored by principals, and as such we collectively manipulate the customer, the manufacturer and the system in order to achieve the desired result.

Don't fool yourself, there is no more measure of Customer Satisfaction on the survey. What you see is a grading scale of your ability to manipulate it.

[Michael White]

NADA Chairman Charley Smith made an important speech at the NADA. Part of his discussion is to continue to push for CSI survey changes. Quote" ....Charley Smith will continue predecessor Alan Starling's efforts to get automakers to revise their CSI policies and surveys. Current practices force dealers to chase scores instead of focusing on customers and give consumers a bad case of survey fatigue"

Mega dealer Jack Fitzgerald discussed at the NADA CSI procedure concerns. He stated the current automaker CSI programs "are hurting dealers" He states, "I'd like to get this CSI monkey off my back. With the current system, OEMs don't have a clue as to what their customers really think, because dealers are forced to chase scores instead of pleasing customers" "Automaker CSI surveys intrude into customers lives...." These quotes came from autoexecmag.com

CSI should be a tool. With the money automakers are throughing at it, and the costs to dealers if they do not achieve it, the persute of CSI can hinder the process of true customer satisfaction. I guess my observations and frustrations are not unique,

[This message has been edited by Michael White (edited 02-04-2004).]