- This topic has 27 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Re: trade qualifications ?
kwatt wrote:Some of what you say I don’t disagree with at all Lee, such as a basic understanding of how the products work and a bit of diagnostics skill.
I remain deeply unconvinced however that compulsory training driven by legislation would actually achieve that and I can find no data from any industry even remotely similar that demonstrates that is what would happen.
K.
Does not mean its not possible. I dont believe its healthy to employ people incapable of doing the job there employed to do. The last month i’ve seen both CV’s and completion/performance figures that show its happening. There is nothing stopping one of these people leaving a well known appliance repair company and setting up there own business doing work for WP’s and the public at large and the only measure of there capabilities is there experience vetted by recruitment agencies or bosses pissed because of the poor performance, remove that and there is nothing preventing any idiot looseRe: trade qualifications ?
How about this! I worked for Hoover many years ago, including a 3 year stint training engineers. Maybe engineers of my age should be paid to take out newer engineers, to teach them the basics of fault finding. Years of experience allows a competent engineer to repair modern machines by a series of fault finding procedures. The ability to understand obtainable service manuals is also required. Maybe the government should force manufacturers to supply paid training to independent companies, making it safer for customers.
The basics can be taught by a college or training centre, but this is only the beginning. Field and manufacturer supported training is essential. Just like old fashioned apprenticeships. Manufacturers should be forced to supply technical information to anyone requesting it, albeit with a warning to unskilled idiots.Re: trade qualifications ?
CCHRISTOF wrote:Maybe the government should force manufacturers to supply paid training to independent companies, making it safer for customers.
I love it when someone suggests “the government” should intervene. This trade has thrived for well over 75 years and will continue to do so the way it is. It doesn’t need fixing, it isn’t broken and customers safety has never been an issue either!
CCHRISTOF wrote:Manufacturers should be forced to supply technical information to anyone requesting it, albeit with a warning to unskilled idiots.
Technical information is always an advantage but never a necessity. It would be interesting to know how ” forcing” the manufacturers into submission would be possible, “the government” stepping in on our behalf again I suppose?
Re: trade qualifications ?
It was only a thought. I spend much of my time following other engineers. As I don’t advertise much, many of the recommendations I get are usually messed up appliances. I am feeling my age now and don’t want a constant supply of cock-ups to repair. And, why shouldn’t the government do something useful for a change? The trade may have thrived for 75 years, and it has given me a good living, but sticking your head in the sand does not help modern service engineers, unable to get information or equipment from manufacturers. There is no reason for withholding information. The customer should come first.
Re: trade qualifications ?
i could write 1000’s of words on this, i have before, but it all boils down to money! The only reason that service providers pass work to bad engineers is because its cheeper, they dont care if that engineer visits 6 times, they dont pay recalls! And they certainly dont care about the customer service!
Its the responsibility of the manufacturer to make sure their products are serviced by Skilled and resposible engineers and in my opinion many dont, in my patch there is a person who did a course on domestic appliance repairs and he worked for a well known Service company and then moved on to working for a manufacturer and i have had many discussions with him as he likes to diagnose faults with out even taking the top and back off appliances!! One of the worst “engineers” i have encountered in 32 years.
One thing is for sure goverment intervention and regulation will not change that, because you cant make a bad apple taste good! (yes my opinion has changed on regulation, i am still learning!)Re: trade qualifications ?
As I often say, you can’t teach experience.
You can convey the experience and the lessons learnt, but teaching it into a trainee is not possible.
I notice that many fall into two distinct camps and, I am massively simplifying here for the purpose of demonstration:
Repairers that identify what they need through a bit of detective work basically and are very specific in what they require. Let’s call this Group A.
Repairers that just throw parts at stuff until they get it right or, order up a bunch of stuff in a bid to get it sorted. Let’s call this Group B.
The people that fall into Group A I generally have no issue with because they will sit and work out what the problem actually is and resolve it. Sure they get stuck from time to time but they know what the machines they work on do, how they should behave and what the result should be. From that, they can work out the problem.
Although, it has to be said, some of them could be doing with working on their customer skills. 😉
Group B is where the problem lies.
This group don’t really know what they’re doing and are just guessing, not actually diagnosing and I don’t really have a heap of time for that because, to my mind, that’s little better than Joe Public, they can guess at what the problem is as well, often just as well.
Group B generally will have little understanding of what the machines do, how they actually work and what the results are supposed to be. Sure, they can run a spec test and, like trained monkeys, can do what they are instructed to do. But, when you get someone like that looking for support the thought is that they really don’t care and really don’t want to be doing the job. These people are the ones that are happy enough to do the easy jobs but, when things get a bit more challenging, would rather walk away.
Customer skills in this group tend to range but mostly, not so good. Often because they have little clue what they’re on about and tend to use BS to get out of the scrapes they get into.
Probably, in a good many cases, these guys could do the job just fine if they were prepared to learn what they need and care a bit about what they do to earn a crust.
Now, if you stop and think about this and I’m not having a pop at anyone really here, it’s just the way it is, most of us will have come from a larger service operation or a manufacturer service background. You have your van loaded to the gunnels with parts that you can swap out and you have a very high familiarity with the brands and their particular quirks.
This is often working on one brand or a few, not the 200+ that are out there.
The knowledge from one or a few in basic diagnostic skills apply to all or, should do but in my experience and opinion this rarely translates as manufacturers don’t tend to teach basic diagnostic skills. They train you to repair a particular range using a pre-defined set of rules but that even has problems within it.
But the presumption often from manufacturers is that you are attending a fault, you repair the faulty part, job done.
So long as the problem goes away at as low a cost as possible and the minimum of grief from the customer, they’re happy enough.
If it gets really bad and you can’t solve the problem you often have the option to have the machine replaced or if it’s insured, written off, not the engineer’s problem anymore. And, because there’s no penalty really in doing so, no incentive not to take that path if things get a bit too hard or the customer is a royal PITA.
Once they move away from being employed by a manufacturer and aren’t having the corporate line drilled into them every so often many seem to think that they no longer have a need to learn anything. This isn’t true, there is always new things to learn or figure out.
My point being that the system that we pretty much largely grew up with has created where we are today and, without changing that system fundamentally and forcing field service engineers to actually use their noggins, it won’t change. A qualification will not in any way, shape or form make anyone use their brain and apply some common sense to sussing a problem out. That I am afraid, is entirely down to the attending technician and how bright they are.
K.
Re: trade qualifications ?
You have a very warped vision of your colleagues in the repair trade Ken is you think most fit either in “Group A” or “Group B”. But perhaps you are just prompting comment and nothing more? Lee8 is the only guy I know reckons the repair industry is full of Group B’s but that’s probably just down to the company he works for? Whatever the truth is this sort of talk does little to promote the image of the lowly field service engineer.
Re: trade qualifications ?
No Martin, I really do not have a warped view at all but I do probably have a much wider one than many people do.
And, as I said, that was for illustration only, I wasn’t pigeonholing anyone in particular to being one thing or another, it was very broad strokes to make a point.
I also think that rather than pretending all in the garden is rosy is hardly the best course either and that pointing out where people are perhaps not at their best is a positive, not a negative. After all, if it improved all the talk of mandatory testing or whatever wouldn’t be required, would it?
K.
Re: trade qualifications ?
I think Ken’s analysis is spot on, although, in reality most engineers fit somewhere on a continuum between Type A and Type B.
I shared a kitchen once with one of our local gas boiler engineers and was surprised to witness him trying to repair an electrical fault on the system without any kind of test meter. After trying a new thermostat and then a new pcb, he appeared completely stumped. He confided in me he disliked fault finding and preferred routine servicing, but this was one of his regular customers.
So much for compulsory training and Gas Safe registration! And of course every boiler is supplied with a service manual and wiring diagram!
Re: trade qualifications ?
stratfordgirl wrote:in reality most engineers fit somewhere on a continuum between Type A and Type B.
Exactly. I’m glad at least someone got it.
Some guys are utterly brilliant on one product group, do repair but aren’t so hot on others. Some are brilliant at dealing with customers, some aren’t. Some are superb at diagnosis on many, but are cr4p on customer skills. I could go on and on with that with a myriad of combinations, one size does not fit all. Hence using polar extremes to illustrate the point.
But it is rare that you get people that are good at it all. There are a few out there and I hold them in very high regard indeed, many are way superior to me and many others as repairers.
The trick (IMO) is to recognise where you’re not so brilliant and to try to work on that and improve.
Sometimes and, I am very guilty of doing this to repairers when they look for tech help etc, it requires some “tough love” as it were. That means you have to give some people a good kick in the nether regions to get them to wake up to where they need a bit of help or they need to improve. It’s not personal, it’s just what’s necessary IMO to help them to help themselves.
I don’t object to being called out for being wrong myself, if I’m wrong, I’m wrong and, you lot aren’t exactly shy in telling me when I am. 😉
Would a qualification help with any of that? Somehow, I doubt it.
But, kudos for all those that want to learn and are prepared to put in the time and effort to do so.
K.
Re: trade qualifications ?
I would agree somewhat with the A & B category however you can’t always blame the engineers. With the modern electronic modules, linear pressure switches and digital sensors it almost impossible to test them, you have no choice to to take a guess basses on what you believe is the problem.
Iv spend a lot of time working on cars and most now use a CAN bus network system between all parts, every sensor and control switch can be on this network, a car i was working on last month had its steering volume controlled as part of the network and these had failed, its made diagnostics impossible with our specialist tools. Gone are the days when you could check a crank sensor with a meter or a volume switch for continuity
Manufactures have forced people into this position as much as the engineers have them selves. .Re: trade qualifications ?
You often can test electronic components for resistance and change, more often than not.
But, you need the information to do so and know what the readings should be in some cases. Some just need a bit of common sense.
Test procedures tell you a lot as well but, if you don’t have them you can’t run them. It would make sense to see what you can find out about the machine you’re attended before you go, at least the basics.
That said, I would say that about 90{e5d1b7155a01ef1f3b9c9968eaba33524ee81600d00d4be2b4d93ac2e58cec2d} or more of all tech calls I get, when I ask what showed up on the test procedure I will get the response that it hasn’t been run. Then you get asked for the information, which is in the forum and has been sent to all agents at least once. Or, you get the “I didn’t know you could do that” response.
Other top hits include, what parts should I order for XXXX before I go.
“The machine does YYYYYY, what part is faulty?”
Twice the past year I’ve been asked by an field tech how to get into a tumble dryer. 😕
Several where the PCB and/or motor and inverter ordered only to come back looking for something else due to misdiagnosis or, guessing before going.
To me that could point to a number of things but I’m betting you can guess how professional things like this look to the outside world, including the customer.
K.
Re: trade qualifications ?
We’ll never get it perfect. But at least in time band B will be reduced in numbers, put off by the required academic level required to be competant enough to do basic fault finding. Hopefully that will stop people guessing, which in my experience is a combination of too many calls, too little time, part costs ( you cant have high cost parts on first visit excuse) and lack of technical info, but the biggest issue i see is they simple dont understand the science and dont posses the ability to test. Thats mainly the issue with people working for WP’s or large companies doing multi brand work. In my experience most one man outfits simple do not bother doing appliances they’ve never worked on before or come on sites like UKW or the old fashion way, ring a mate within the industry.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.