|
LZ真是太牛了，怎么找到原文的？用google吗？我觉得google收索很不好找到原文。多谢高手！！ 以下是引用AlienX在2008-3-9 7:17:00的发言：
RC有原文:
Several auto makers have decided that improving customer satisfaction
with service at dealerships would raise repurchase loyalty. They have
lavished vast sums and considerable management attention on training
and technical support programs—but detected no noticeable impact. What
has been going wrong?
The OEMs’ efforts have certainly not been misdirected. Analysis of
customer survey data reveals that satisfaction with service accounts
for one-third of total customer satisfaction, and is predominantly
driven by the ability to repair a vehicle correctly, on time, and at
the first attempt. Average dealer performance against this target is 65
percent—meaning that one in three customers would need to go back for
further repairs. "Best in class"(有題) performance, however, approaches 90
percent, so there is ample room for improvement.
A fix that failed
The traditional solution to this performance shortfall was to establish
a policy of mandatory training to make technicians more effective. But
extra training meant they spent less time at work. Exacerbated by
flat-rate compensation that favored throughput rather than quality of
service, pressure mounted at dealerships. The diagnostic stage of the
repair process was often rushed, leading to failure to detect faults
and thus defeating the object of the training.
In addition, rising training costs and forgone revenues ate into
dealers’ profits, prompting them to reduce their investment in tools
and equipment, thereby limiting technicians’ overall effectiveness.
OEM strategies concerning the use of advanced diagnostic equipment were
also vitiated by unanticipated secondary effects. One extremely costly
device designed to improve diagnostic accuracy had a very low usage
rate, despite being considered technically superb. The reason for its
neglect was the fifteen minutes or so that it took to set it up—time
that pressured technicians felt they could ill afford to spend.
Moreover, a lack of initial training produced low familiarity,
reinforcing underutilization which in turn reinforced low familiarity.
One OEM decided that in order to improve performance, it needed to
identify where bottlenecks were occurring, and why. It applied Business
Dynamics to model the repair performance of an actual dealership. It
tested a scenario involving several new initiatives it had devised to
fix the service problem by enhancing training and building technical
and diagnostic support. The modeled initiatives produced some
improvements, but they were limited and short-lived.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disappointing results can be reversed by addressing the powerful secondary effects inherent in the system
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyzing the model revealed that these disappointing results could be
reversed by addressing the powerful secondary effects inherent in the
system. Incentives to diagnose the real underlying problem with a
vehicle were weak, since pay structures encouraged technicians to
complete jobs as quickly as possible. In addition, initial improvements
in the service process tended to get caught up at existing bottlenecks,
sometimes even making them worse. Service advisers became overloaded
and less effective; increased retail demand, generated by better
short-term performance, compounded time pressures and prompted
technician shortcuts; and new technicians hired to meet demand diluted
the average level of experience.
The analysis also showed that the OEM support initiatives brought least
benefit to those who needed them the most—the low-performing dealers.
The rate of improvement for these dealers was a mere 4 percentage
points, whereas their high-performing counterparts achieved an 11-point
leap. Thus the aspiration to improve "fix-it-right" performance to 85
to 90 percent was still way beyond reach (Exhibit 1).
| 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
楼主
发表于 2008-3-9 13:04:00
