A detailed study of the warranty processing system used by the global automotive industry has pinpointed a lack of standardisation in the way warranties are handled by dealers, suppliers and original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), which leads to unnecessary costs and inaccurate information, according to a report from Centre for Automotive Research (CAR) and Microsoft.
Go deeper with GlobalData
The report concludes that new challenges from the surge of in-vehicle electronics, strategies by OEMs to shift more warranty costs to suppliers, and less-developed warranty processes in emerging nations all will present significant challenges to the industry in the near future.
The initial study, titled ‘The Warranty Process Flow Within the Automotive Industry’, is the first in a series of studies on automotive industry practices and is intended to improve product quality and help the industry understand how warranty data may be used to improve business operations and future products.
The research, carried out by Ann Arbor, Michigan-based CAR and sponsored by Microsoft’s automotive and industrial equipment industry solution group in Southfield, Michigan, gathered in-depth information from a highly targeted group of industry thought leaders, including executives from dealerships, suppliers and OEMs.
The research uncovered the highly variable ways of collecting and reporting data on warranty repairs that not only were inconsistent among various manufacturers and dealers, but also resulted in internal systems that were guarded as competitive advantages. The report suggested the end results likely were higher costs for warranty repairs and a failure to capitalise fully on information obtained from these repairs to prevent component failures in the future.
How well do you really know your competitors?
Access the most comprehensive Company Profiles on the market, powered by GlobalData. Save hours of research. Gain competitive edge.
Thank you!
Your download email will arrive shortly
Not ready to buy yet? Download a free sample
We are confident about the unique quality of our Company Profiles. However, we want you to make the most beneficial decision for your business, so we offer a free sample that you can download by submitting the below form
By GlobalDataAs an example, the study pointed out that most respondents – even those in repair shops – felt that taking the same part or problem to five different dealers would possibly result in the failure being identified and coded differently by each repairer. This difference could even place responsibility for the failure on different suppliers, depending on how the cause was viewed. The study noted that “increasingly the traceability of parts will become a competitive advantage in the automotive industry.”
In the study, headed by Brett Smith, assistant director of manufacturing engineering and technology at CAR, industry executives declared that good mechanics are becoming very difficult to find, a factor that is becoming increasingly troublesome.
While the report noted that the process of transmitting warranty repair information from vehicle maker to dealer is now much more efficient through electronic and internet-based systems, a great deal of monitoring still is required as a first line of defence in identifying possible warranty problems.
When information is entered into a database, the report noted, “Each manufacturer has developed very established and confidential internal systems.” Moreover, those accessing the data often did not know its value to others in the organisation.
“Instead of sharing information that can be vital to reducing warranty costs, manufacturers often are protecting the data they gather,” Smith said. “One of the key findings of this study is that the warranty process often is being driven by ingenuity in going ‘around the system’ instead of revamping the ways in which data are collected and analysed for continuous improvement.”
Hindrances to discovering root causes
The method that dealers use to return parts also can hinder discovering root causes of problems. Some, the report says, dispose of parts on-site. In other cases manufacturers or suppliers randomly select dealers to submit a limited number of parts for analysis. Components may be sent back through a parts centre, a warranty processing location or directly to the supplier. One supplier said an OEM sends it a “box of parts” with no information or explanation of the failure. This haphazard methodology is compounded by the immense volume of data to be handled. The report estimates that the motor industry handles more than 100 million warranty claims per year, which translates to billions of warranty data fields of information annually.
Data should be shared up and down the supply and demand chains to help ensure that information in the system can be translated to actionable steps that improve quality, reduce component failures and cut the cost of warranty operations.
The report concludes, “Not only are companies challenged to develop methods of effectively capturing and storing warranty data, but also [to] have the ability to access the information in a timely – and perhaps most important – a cost-effective way.” Available data are inconsistent and some suppliers say they need greater responsiveness from OEMs to their data requests, the study says.
Market factors complicate process
While internal systems hamper the effective use of warranty data and reductions in costs for the warranty process, market factors are complicating the process and raising the stakes.
– Mechanics who are used to handling electrical wiring face the very distinct challenge of understanding electronic glitches in the quickly spreading use of in-car electronic systems.
– OEMs are working to shift much more of the cost burden for warranty repairs to suppliers, a trend that “would likely hurt long-term warranty performance as suppliers shift resources to defend their actions instead of proactively working to resolve issues,” according to the study.
– Differing warranty systems among major global markets hold back efficiencies, while “operations in markets with relatively undeveloped dealer networks… can not meet the same warranty standards as those in more experienced markets,” those interviewed suggest.
The report concludes that “the heart of the current process is behavioural [but] from the dealership through to the supplier, each of the interviewees had examples of how they went beyond the process ‘structure’ to obtain a better result.”
