What's In It For You?
CHICAGO (Oct. 12, 2005) - The National Automotive Service Task Force (NASTF) is poised to go full-time.
In an industry where so often we find ourselves talking about features, rather than benefits, there's an all-out effort to involve all aspects of the industry - from automaker to parts maker, from distributor to technician, and from consumer to government - with a view to answering the essential question: "What's in it for you?"
The Equipment and Tools Institute (ETI) has proposed formalizing NASTF, to transition from what has been a voluntary and cooperative effort since late 2000 into a full-time, staffed organization that would still retain the cooperative spirit experienced to date, said Charlie Gorman, ETI's executive manager. Gorman set aside some time to talk with Motor Age about the draft proposal.
Food for thought Gorman explained that the proposal was just a starting point. "What ETI has done is put up a straw-man, to get the ball rolling and generate discussion to formalize NASTF." He explained that by putting the proposal forward before the scheduled organizational meeting on Oct. 19 in Detroit, interested participants would have time to think about defining the future form and function of NASTF, as well as come prepared to provide input and consider the ideas of others.The draft proposal and suggested organization chart can be read or downloaded in its entirety on the ETI Web site. Some of the major initiatives of the draft proposal include the following:
* Structure NASTF as a full-time working group, responsible to its Steering Committee, which would be comprised of representatives from any organizations that fund the full-time NASTF operation costs.
* Drive current functions of NASTF, such as access to service information, and new ones as industry needs arise or evolve.
* Be open and transparent to all industry participants, the public and the government.
* Use the NASTF model to springboard to global cooperation.
* Evaluate progress over a three-year transition period, beginning in 2006.
Why formalize now? Gorman reiterated that ETI is neither for nor against proposed legislation before Congress. ETI, he said, has customers on both sides of the equation, in both the aftermarket and OEM sectors. What is essential is that there is a structure that is in place, with buy-in from all, to drive the transfer of service information, tools and training on a full-time basis between manufacturer and service professional, to effect repairs and maintenance for consumers while safeguarding their security.The need for a formalized NASTF - with meaningful dialogue and genuine cooperative actions by all is there, whether legislation passes or not, Gorman said. "If a formalized NASTF is successful without legislation, fine. If legislation is passed, a body like a formalized NASTF would be useful, given the alternative of each OEM acting on its own, dealing with government. That scenario is too much like what happened with Fed World."
In that time of federal regulation, when there wasn't an organization like NASTF, everyone was on their own in attempts to access information, Gorman commented. A federal web site - FedWorld - was established, but with little success. The experience was far from user-friendly, and the exercise of just trying to log-in, let alone crawl through the maze, was time-consuming and frustrating, often without results.
He also added that in his experience, within a regulated environment, participants tend to stay within the bounds of the mandates, which limits cooperation; however, in an unregulated environment such as NASTF, there is more cooperation and success because people don't know where the bounds are and give more.
"NASTF has been good to us. We've gotten more out of NASTF than any regulation or lawmaking has provided. The cooperation has helped ETI serve the interests of its customers, both on the aftermarket and OEM side."
For technicians: a full-time driven process With the current inquiry process in place, trying to get concerns resolved is limited by the fact that people working full-time in other jobs are the ones who also try to facilitate resolution in their voluntary time. It's not unlike a full-time technician having to do training in her or his free, voluntary time. We're all working people - with spouses, families and other important activities and responsibilities to tend to."Formalizing NASTF will improve the timeframe to resolution by having a full-time person dedicated to driving the inquiry-resolution process," Gorman shared.
It's important to understand that the staff in a formalized NASTF need the assistance of subject matter experts to draw on to help filter inquiries. No one person can be expected to know everything about every area. For instance, Gorman explained that he serves as a filter for equipment and tool inquiries, to advise NASTF as to which inquiries, based on his experience, merit being sent to an OEM. Experts in other areas do likewise. Gorman added that going forward, it's important to avoid wasting anybody's time to ensure buy-in.
Public opinion and pressure do matter. The perception of an automaker in consumers' eyes carries weight, said Gorman. Resolution of service problems is integral to that, and he sees a formalized NASTF with a full-time driver turbocharging the process. But if and when necessary, he suggested, "A formalized NASTF will use informed public opinion and pressure to get OEMs to comply. We see this driving the industry, both inside (OEMs and the automotive aftermarket) and outside (consumer motoring)."
An open and transparent structure for everyone "We want to be transparent and open to all - the industry, the public, government, and any other interested parties," Gorman asserted. He envisions a formalized NASTF wherein any interested organization that wishes to fund NASTF would have a voting representative on a Steering Committee, which would supervise the entire NATF operation."There's no reason why any group couldn't attend, participate, or even be a contributing voting member. That's up to them," he added. It's important that no group feel locked out or uniformed. Whether consumer advocate groups, motorist organizations such as AAA, the Better Business Bureau, government agencies like the EPA or FTC, Do-It-Yourself market groups or the media - a formalized NASTF would welcome them all. "Communication with the public is important too." Ensuring that full and accurate information as to the proceedings and actions of NASTF is provided to the public is in everybody's interest.
A model for global industry cooperation "NASTF is a U.S.-only organization at this point. To get international agreements from foreign-based OEMs, establishing a NASTF template that works here could serve as a model to be used in the European Union, Japan or elsewhere and to leverage off of," said Gorman.He pointed out that only two automakers - Ford and GM - can make decisions here that bind all their worldwide operations. The others, such as DaimlerChrysler or Toyota are headquartered outside the United States, and worldwide decisions are made in Germany and Japan respectively. More international cooperation has the potential over time to standardize international regulations with a view towards reducing duplicate costs in systems, tools and inventories downstream.
For example, Gorman said that OBDII regulations cover only emissions, while EOBD in Europe encompasses emissions and safety. Consider the ramifications of global standards that could facilitate the ability of technicians and shops to use one scan tool on all makes and models.
Another is the emergence of developing nations such as China, who are looking to expand production and exports. Gorman said, "China is going to standardize. The question is who will they emulate? Given Chinese discussions within the EU, it looks like they will be going with EOBD standards for domestic use, which include safety requirements. To sell into the U.S., they'll still have to comply with OBDII here."
Gorman said that ETI holds annual meetings with automaker and tool associations throughout the world. In an upcoming meeting in Japan, ETI is looking to invite the Korean automakers - who comprise 5 percent of U.S. sales - and would welcome the Chinese to those meetings, too. Using a NASTF template in global applications just makes sense.
Review after three years The proposal suggests a three-year timeframe with a "sunset clause" being considered for the end of that timeframe. Gorman explained that in ETI's view, three years would provide enough time to show that a formalized NASTF works for all."One year is too short. Two years would make it difficult to hire anybody, knowing they could well be looking for a job soon. And three years is shorter than a government turnaround," he commented.
While progress could be reviewed and adjustments made over the course of each of the three years, having a review process at its end is necessary. "The sunset clause legitimizes the process. Letting NASTF operate for three years will place it in the position to know what works and doesn't and set its own goals," Gorman said. "Whether it continues using ETI or becomes self-standing, ETI's and the industry's interests are served with a viable organization. As well, over a three-year period, the needs of the industry may well change or evolve, which reconsideration at that time will embrace."
So ... the upcoming meeting is set. There's much to consider, with decisions that will impact the entire industry and the motoring public. The question is who will be an active part of the dialogue and who will be a spectator on the sidelines?
Editor's Note: Our coverage of this important issue will continue next week with a report from the Oct. 19 meeting in Detroit in the next edition of The Scoop.
