Posting Techs hours

[flyboy]

Two lines of thought come to mind when asked if I would be posting the daily hours of my techs, I am the "new" service manager in a dispatch shop.

Seems the past posting of such has caused a bit of contintion amongst the natives, though the previous mgr was looking to stir up some friendly competition amongst them.

I have my opinions and reasons for such, but thought it might be an interesting topic for us to discuss.... ok, really I was hopeing one of you might be able to sway me <grin>.

Thanks for any input.

[PROUSER]

Having been a tech for 20 years I can say that the number of hours "given" to you is more a function of your ability to schmooz the svc mgr, than your ability perform the work at a slow or fast pace, or even your seniority or loyalty. In 4 dealerships, I NEVER saw work handed out fairly; that is why this is such a point of contention between techs.

Friendly competition eh? How would you like to compete with your peers at the dealership, knowing if you do not fare well, you may not be able to pay your mortgage this month??? I do not see anything friendly about this, in fact you are incenting them to do faster but not better work if you are working strictly by the number of hours they get !

[warr_wiz]

Rather than posting the actual FRH's, why not try posting efficiancy? I have been posting these #'s and at the end of the week, everyone is looking for the sheet. It does seem to get a good competition going without causing any contintion.

[robc]

Competition only works when everyone can be competitive. As with everything, it's really hard to take a group of people who are equally competitive in the long term.

My story is that Randy was our top tech in terms of both FRH and efficiency. While some techs came close and once or twice a year they'd flag more than him, no one ever fooled themselves that they were ore productive than Randy was. So, while we all kind of knew who was flagging what per week, there wasn't any competition because no one was going to beat Randy.

The point is, I think if you want to increase productivity then reward self-improvements over competition.


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

[Richard]

I was P&S Director at a small import store several years ago, in a small town. When I took over, there were some techs making 60~80 hours/week, and 1 or 2 struggling along at 35=/-. I moved work around the shop to make things more even, and within a few weeks, everyone was doing 45~50 hours per week. Well, the tech that used to make 60~80, went to the owner, and he threw a fit...told me that he expected me to 'feed' the 2 techs that complained, and he didn't care about the others....I gave in, and later went back to being just Parts Manager, because I lost all the other techs trust when I had to fold to the Owner's pressure....be careful making ANY changes, unless you KNOW management will back you.
I still say 8 techs making you 45~50 hours is better than having 2 techs making 70, and the other 6 barely making 35.....(10 hours a week difference x 52....520 hours per year)

[gman]

For Prouser:

I know this is a bit off the posted subject.
Although I maintain a master technician certification, I do not make a living pulling wrenches. (I did long ago) After managing parts and service departments for 20 years I continue to hear the same things from techs in every part of the country. I don't dispute their truth, but regardless of the system used, there is always a percentage of the team that feels taken advantage of. After 20 years on your side of the fence, give us some clues to keeping you guys happy and motivated. I guarantee you that is what most of us are searching for.

gman

[Mikal54]

Having a great deal of experience as a technician and in service management, I believe that there are a number of issues often overlooked in regard to posting technician hours.
1. For the sake of competition - competition among technicians is most often counter productive and breeds comtempt. In most cases, every technician will produce the most hours he / she can, provided with a workmix that meets their real competency. It is the responsibility of management to identify the cause for less than expected performance.
2. In regard to workmix - Posting of flat rate hours produced is not just a measurement of the tehnician's performance. The fairness and accuracy of dispatch is also being exposed. My experience has always been that the "gravy dog(s)" howl loudest.
3. Posting the hours in the shop often occurs as the result of best idea session,a twenty group suggestion or at the recommendation of a consultant; and is seldom recognized to be a part of a culture shift. When all parties involved understand the total picture ( dispatching, production, pay rates, skill levels, ect ) flat rate hour posting is a highly effective communication, diagnostic and motivational tool for the entire shop.

[ScottM]

My experience as a former F/R Tech then a Fixed Ops Mgr for over 18 years, was that it can be very productive to post tech hours if you do have a perception from your techs that they do receive fair work distribution equating to management supporting them to be as productive as possible. If not it only highlights the inequities (real or only perceived) and can have a very negative affect. I had a very positive experience with a balanced shop and only posted tech hours when associated with friendly competition sparing events (horse race etc.) that they received bonuses or spiffs from. If you are afraid of tipping over the apple cart, there are probably deeper management / employee issues needing some desperate attention. I have also had good luck with simply benchmarking performance individually with each tech based on each techs senario. I conducted an initial performance review (that went both ways) to communicated how we could best support each other and reviewed them on a weekly basis and compensated those who acheived the mutually set goals and identified those who needed extra help. Either way it was a good way to show that I valued them very much and demonstrated how we both benefited from the activity. I say be creative but whatever you do, do it in a way that makes them feel that they are value not only for what they do but what they think.

[Mike Vogel]

I have had success with posting productivity percentages only without any complaints. We also offer bonuses based on productivity so everyone wants to see their name in " lights"
at the end of the pay period or month if they hit the productivity bonus.

------------------
Mike Vogel
Claremont Toyota/Ford
Claremont, CA

[David Cates]

Having never worked in a dealership service dept, I am not really qualified to post an opinion on this. But of course I won't let that stop me

I will say that I did sell a few ADP systems by bringing ERO (Electronic Repair Order) into the sales process. It seems to me that one way to move beyond the dispatching "bias" perception is by having a completely automated process that electronically dispatches work based on the tech's skills and availability. Allowing the technicians to be part of the "setup" of the skills, etc... made the buy in even greater.

ERO was always a pain in the $%# to implement, but once it was in and things settled down (and if set up correctly), many of the dispatch problems were minimized.

Since I no longer work for ADP it should be obvious I am not "plugging" the product. I just have always thought that ADP's ERO and R&R's ESI applications were so often undersold by the vendor and underestimated by the dealership. I don't think many ADP reps knew the product good enough to really understand it's value and provide a true return on investment analysis to the dealer, and I don't think R&R reps ever wanted to bring ESI into the picture and have the dealership make a decision based on ERO vs. ESI (just my take, doesn't mean it's right . In my opinion, ERO was/is the best product ADP has introduced into the automotive dealership. Im just not sure they knew it. I know the products have always been perceived as expensive (they are , but for me it was the one product I truly believed could add tremendously to the dealership's bottom line.

I am curious what the perception is these days about completely automating the service department (i.e. ERO, ESI, and UCS's version), and also why others think the products never really penetrated the market on a large scale.


David