fixed right the first time

[TEXAS_CHIC]

We track our comebacks through a head tech in the shop (he determines if it is related, comeback or clm b) but it is very time consuming for him and the advisors often bypass this tech. We would like to find a better way, but everything we have tried has not worked well. Any suggestions? We have great training in this dealership, but we find that even with it, we have comebacks and npf too often. Also, we are looking for a new version of a writeup sheet that might include more description prompts than what we currently use. Suggestions?

[fburrows]

This was always a great topic of discussion but my rule was that if the customer thinks it is a comeback then it counts. I think lots of time and effort are wasted trying to determine if someone was at fault and everybody blaming everybody else. If one tech gets twice as many comebacks as another tech doing the same kind of work then there is a problem. The same goes for the service advisors. If one gets a lot more then there is a problem with that individual.

I think that it is great for management to run down individual cases to determine fault but as far as keeping statistics, it will save a lot of time and be a lot more accurate, if the raw numbers are counted. It also stops people from giving favorable treatment to the people they like.

------------------
Frank Burrows ABS
fburrows@absdata.com

[Ronc925]

I agree with Frank. I you know how each individual ranks you can easily determine the problem area or individual.

Having been a tech, I have seen very few that do not want to do their job properly. I think 99% of the techs want to do the job right the first time.

Having been an advisor, there have been times I did not get the proper information for the tech to fix a problem, or was too busy to follow through and quality checking a difficult repair. Both of these types of issues were my direct fault, and my manager's indirect fault for not having a defined comeback process in use 100% of the time. If I had known he was watching and counting, I propably would have been more thorough.

From your statement of advisors by-passing your head tech, I think you have more of an management and advisor process issue.

[chucks]

We use a process where a 'red sheet' is created for every potential comeback. That is a vehicle returning for a same or similar customer concern within 90 days or 4,000 miles. The sheets are given to the team managers (aka foremen) and they review the overall picture to determine the root cause of the customer needing to 'comeback'. A summary comeback log sheet is kept for each tech that gives a quick picture of the areas that merit attention. The log is a grid that breaks each valid comeback repair down by skill group involved and by root cause (workmanship, training, wrong procedure, failure to verify repair, etc). This gives us a quick picture of what action is appropriate to IMPROVE the situation. Raw numbers may be impressive and easy to look at, but they provide no information useful in addressing the problem. For example; Ford has had an ongoing vendor problem with DPFE sensors, based on raw numbers our driveability techs would have accumulated a large raw number of 'comebacks' that are actually the result of a condition beyond their control. On the other hand using a column on the log sheet for 'Service Part Failed' will quickly eliminate the misleading comeback numbers from the cases where the technician did have control over the quality of the previous repair.

[Mike Vogel]

Another way if you are on Reynold's & Reynold's would be to run 3616 Tech Comeback Report. Most times the advisor will use the same base op code on both visits. Run the report every morning for previous days work and you can review quickly. Sometimes the vehicle is back for a special order part, sometimes a different concern, but this is about as easy for me to locate shop comebacks and address with the tech/advisor quickly before it's forgotten.

[This message has been edited by Mike Vogel (edited 12-02-2003).]