There is an industry association project underway to study the concept of a single data pool to serve the entire aftermarket. For some time now, I have been a volunteer member of the team performing that study. As a part of the due diligence efforts on behalf of the project, I recently participated in an extensive data gathering exercise that we dubbed, “the listening tour.”
The tour involved thousands of miles of travel to sit with key executives from more than 30 companies. Included were resellers ranging from national retail chains to single location distributors; manufacturers from small specialty operations to multinational, multiline makers of replacement parts; and a smattering of data service providers. It was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to sit face-to-face with business decision makers, mostly at their places of business, to talk about technology in the aftermarket and the data required to make it work.
What I was able to learn on that tour was nothing short of stunning, both in the positive and negative senses of the word. It confirmed that our industry is far behind where we need to be on both the technology and data fronts. But it’s also clear that we are gaining a better understanding of the importance of the subject everyday. I want to share some anecdotes from the listening tour and let you the reader decide where we are and what we need to do as an industry to better use technology. As usual, names have been left out to protect the guilty…
• One specialty distributor had been harping for years about the abysmal state of the product data of one of its high-profile, big name-brand suppliers. The supplier’s consistent reaction had been disbelief and denial. How could they, a big-time operation using an industry-leading data service, be so inept as to have “bad data?” Out of complete frustration, the distributor started conducting “peer reviews” of data. They would get several vendors on a webinar and critique the data of all suppliers in a given category. During that review, in front of their peers, the “big-time” supplier was shown how error-laden their data was by comparison. Humiliated, the CEO phoned the distributor principal the next day and asked what he needed to do.
• A major consumer brand of replacement parts was replaced by a not-so-familiar brand at a large national retail chain. One of the stated reasons for the change was the “better data” available with the lesser-known brand. The smaller competitor was able to prove to the retailer that they were losing both sales and share because the application data of the big name brand was riddled with holes. After the change was made, the retailer experienced a 32 percent increase in sales with the same size inventory.
• A small truck accessories company was on the verge of declaring bankruptcy. In something of a “Hail Mary” strategy, they decided to invest in software that would enable consumers to select from a fairly lengthy menu of color, style and other option along with make, model and year to configure orders themselves. When the required intensive data gathering and organizing had been accomplished, the program was made available to a large web seller that caters to outdoor sportsmen. Within six months, the specialty website was the truck accessories company’s largest account and bankruptcy was off the table.
• A major manufacturer of a premier brand has a key part in its line that fits more than 800 unique applications on the ACES vehicle configuration database. An audit of their data revealed that about one third of those applications were not synchronized with the product information (PIES) for that SKU. That meant that one third of the time an eCat was used to look up an application for this part, they would see no product attribute data. For example, look up the part for a Chevrolet or a GMC, there are photos, descriptions, dimensions, etc. Look up the same part for a Buick and see nothing.
These are just a handful of the stories I picked up in conjunction with our data gathering. They confirm the importance of data and technology to growing any business, and remind us that it really is, all about the data. There are clearly different classes of executives in today’s aftermarket: those like the David’s that took out the Goliath at the retail chain with better data; the Hail Mary supplier that saved themselves from bankruptcy; and the deniers that have to be humiliated in front of their peers before they “get it.”
I said I wanted to share these stories to let you readers decide where we are as an industry as it relates to technology data. But perhaps it’s more important to ask each of you which case is most like you? Do you “get it” when it comes to data?
There is an industry association project underway to study the concept of a single data pool to serve the entire aftermarket. For some time now, I have been a volunteer member of the team performing that study. As a part of the due diligence efforts on behalf of the project, I recently participated in an extensive data gathering exercise that we dubbed, “the listening tour.”
The tour involved thousands of miles of travel to sit with key executives from more than 30 companies. Included were resellers ranging from national retail chains to single location distributors; manufacturers from small specialty operations to multinational, multiline makers of replacement parts; and a smattering of data service providers. It was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to sit face-to-face with business decision makers, mostly at their places of business, to talk about technology in the aftermarket and the data required to make it work.
What I was able to learn on that tour was nothing short of stunning, both in the positive and negative senses of the word. It confirmed that our industry is far behind where we need to be on both the technology and data fronts. But it’s also clear that we are gaining a better understanding of the importance of the subject everyday. I want to share some anecdotes from the listening tour and let you the reader decide where we are and what we need to do as an industry to better use technology. As usual, names have been left out to protect the guilty…
• One specialty distributor had been harping for years about the abysmal state of the product data of one of its high-profile, big name-brand suppliers. The supplier’s consistent reaction had been disbelief and denial. How could they, a big-time operation using an industry-leading data service, be so inept as to have “bad data?” Out of complete frustration, the distributor started conducting “peer reviews” of data. They would get several vendors on a webinar and critique the data of all suppliers in a given category. During that review, in front of their peers, the “big-time” supplier was shown how error-laden their data was by comparison. Humiliated, the CEO phoned the distributor principal the next day and asked what he needed to do.
• A major consumer brand of replacement parts was replaced by a not-so-familiar brand at a large national retail chain. One of the stated reasons for the change was the “better data” available with the lesser-known brand. The smaller competitor was able to prove to the retailer that they were losing both sales and share because the application data of the big name brand was riddled with holes. After the change was made, the retailer experienced a 32 percent increase in sales with the same size inventory.
• A small truck accessories company was on the verge of declaring bankruptcy. In something of a “Hail Mary” strategy, they decided to invest in software that would enable consumers to select from a fairly lengthy menu of color, style and other option along with make, model and year to configure orders themselves. When the required intensive data gathering and organizing had been accomplished, the program was made available to a large web seller that caters to outdoor sportsmen. Within six months, the specialty website was the truck accessories company’s largest account and bankruptcy was off the table.
• A major manufacturer of a premier brand has a key part in its line that fits more than 800 unique applications on the ACES vehicle configuration database. An audit of their data revealed that about one third of those applications were not synchronized with the product information (PIES) for that SKU. That meant that one third of the time an eCat was used to look up an application for this part, they would see no product attribute data. For example, look up the part for a Chevrolet or a GMC, there are photos, descriptions, dimensions, etc. Look up the same part for a Buick and see nothing.
These are just a handful of the stories I picked up in conjunction with our data gathering. They confirm the importance of data and technology to growing any business, and remind us that it really is, all about the data. There are clearly different classes of executives in today’s aftermarket: those like the David’s that took out the Goliath at the retail chain with better data; the Hail Mary supplier that saved themselves from bankruptcy; and the deniers that have to be humiliated in front of their peers before they “get it.”
I said I wanted to share these stories to let you readers decide where we are as an industry as it relates to technology data. But perhaps it’s more important to ask each of you which case is most like you? Do you “get it” when it comes to data?