- This topic has 67 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 21 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Re: e-Jobs
I didn’t say they were more capable, you did. What I took from that was that franchised businesses generally have a higher first hit rate on those appliances than the non-franchised simply as they are geared/stocked to do the work. This was based on research carried out way back when by Which, I think I still have the article somewhere but overall it reaches the conclusion that independent service is overall far better, better still when it’s a franchised agent.
I would not argue that there are an awful lot of very capable people out there ranging in size from one man to many employees in size and that we do need more of them.
The problem that I see right now for us all is product diversity and lifespan. Appliances are lasting shorter and shorter periods, the ranges are bigger, more badge engineering than ever going on and spares more diverse as well. Gone are the days when you could go out with half a dozen pumps, boots and some carbs and complete a load of calls, hello 10 different module variations! This is the very thing that makes me turn away non-franchise work as it’s just more hassle than it’s worth in my situation as I simply do not have the time to deal with the diversity of products.
Thn on top of that add into the mix the de-valuing of the product itself in the first place.
K.
kwatt wrote:Fine, if that’s the way you want to go I will honour the request.
As Del-Boy would say ….you know it makes sense!” :tup:
In order to sell the idea of E-jobs to any and all repairers we have to offer our customers a choice. If there is more than on guy in any area, then the customer should be free to choose and not us.
What UKW is offering (unlike for example Yell.com) is a guaranteed standard of work as we ALL sign up under the Code of Practice and are ALL subject to Advisory Council scrutiny :lesson:
That’s it….thats E-jobs….should be a winner I reckon 😉
Martin
Re: e-Jobs
I take the view that we all benefit…equally.
Whether one gets more than another is not the issue, its equal opportunity that counts.
And yes we have to be prepared to share with others in this trade in the future. There are budding new businesses out there who have yet to know it, these guys are still oem engineers at the moment, when they join us as independents we have to be able to let them in.The future development of e-jobs to allow more than one repairer to be shown is the way forward, perhaps in the meantime the customer could have an option to scroll suitable members by postcode.
However you do this ken, its your call, its your e-job system and very much your baby, my concern is that we keep it clean and tidy and as equally accessible to the one man band as an agent for a manufacturer.
We both know that this e-job system is the start of a very much bigger picture, but we must never lose sight of the grass roots of this industry.
Kevin
Re: e-Jobs
Yes I guess it is my call so you’ll just all shut up and do as I say…
Sorry I went all NESN there for a minute! :rotfl:
Not there’s no danger of it, I want to hear what you all have to say as you all know I do listen to what’s said, take it in and do act upon it. There is a compromise here that can be done very easily but I need to cadge a re-write of a bit of the e-jobs module to do it. But to be fair, this discussion has just made that and how I’m thinking on it, all the better for the future so it is never ever a total loss.
Even if I do lose the odd argument. 👿
K.
On the subject of the form, may I point out that it is difficult to describe what you do as a sole trader. I hold no dealerships, franchises or contracts. We do fix just about anything, to a degree that other Leeds engineers will say “Tecniks? Phone Chris, he does all the wierd ones”.
We run a big, well stocked van and maintain a first time repair rate of over 95{e5d1b7155a01ef1f3b9c9968eaba33524ee81600d00d4be2b4d93ac2e58cec2d}. This includes board level on-site repairs. This is all at 10-12 calls a day, 6 days a week.
The form doesn’t let you say that, and therefore looks rather empty. 😥
Regards,
Chris.Re: e-Jobs
I had a feeling this would come up TBH 😉
My view would be this, no weighting in favour of manufacturers agents, it should be open to all on a rotation basis with the only weighting being in favour of UKW subscribers.
Chris, no-one sees that form except us, the customers don’t.
I think in time each repairer will have a “proper” page a bit like the directory listings. No-one added to e-jobs will have their “what we can or don’t repair” shown to the customer, the database will just pick out the “next” person on the list who repairs x appliance.
I hope that makes sense 😕
Dave.
Re: e-Jobs
Okay on thinking through the logic of this you lot have a decision to make.
We are talking about a bit of software here, therefore it’s only as smart as you can make it and there’s only two logical ways in which to allocate any calls.
1.
You take each one and send it “blind” to the recipient of the call with no user intervention at all. In this way we can weight who the call is sent to, be that a subsciber or agent, whatever it doesn’t matter. Point is we control the allocation.
2.
You allow the customer to chose from a list as is suggested in which case any control that we had is lost. There is no logical way in which to control the customer, you can influence, but not control with any degree of certainty where the call will go. Therefore the whole notion then of being able to weight the calls to subscribers or whatever is out the window totally.
There is no happy medium I’m afraid, it’s one way or the other unless someone can come up with something I’m missing.
If you publish rates then the smaller repairers will almost always win as they will, inevitably, be cheaper on labour due to lower costs.
Since all will have to sign up to the charter all are considered equal on service levels, bar an agency perhaps for what that’s worth in the world of chargeable calls.
There is of course the third option. That is to weight the calls based on the three tiers, well two just now, and simply evenly split the work between us all on each level and continue with the “blind” call allocation.
So the choice, as they say, is yours. Tell me what you want done.
Oh and was rightly pointed out, we should have been having this debate months ago as I kinda need to know this, like NOW!!! 😉
K.
Re: e-Jobs
“If you publish rates then the smaller repairers will almost always win as they will, inevitably, be cheaper on labour due to lower costs. “
Dont publish rates then ?Re: e-Jobs
Option 1 was always the way it was planned and I believe the way it should remain until such time it is deemed neccessary to change the format.
Jeremy, even with the rates removed, assuming option 2 is your favoured option, there will be no control over who the customer chooses. The most likely thing is they will choose the one at the top more often than not, and being software, agents will be listed in alphabetical order, so again there is a level of unfairness.
Let’s not forget this a new project, even when it goes live things can be changed and adapted to suit, that’s what we’re good at on UKW, being adaptive and changing/reacting as and when required.
Dave.
Re: e-Jobs
Option 1 looks like the best choice at the moment. No doubt this will be on the agenda at Sibson and we can see where we are then.
JohnOn balance John, I think you’re right.
Let’s just make it work and sort the politics of it out later so we can see what happens as it should (hopefully) be a gradual build up of work from it and not a sudden glut.
K.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.