BUSI 474 Week 3 Discussion Board Forum 2 Thread Example

Discussion Board Forum 2: Customer Retention in the Service Department

BUSI 474 Fixed Operations, Discussion Board Forum 2 Thread and Replies

Thread by [Student Name]

The forum questions, the dealership details and the classmates are composites; the research and the Scripture cited are real.

Thread

Most franchised dealerships see the same pattern. During the factory warranty, owners bring their cars back because warranty repairs must be done at a dealer and because maintenance is often included or expected. Once the warranty ends, many of those owners drift to independent repair shops and quick-lube chains. The loss is larger than it looks. A customer who leaves the service drive takes years of customer-pay repair work with them, and because the service visit is the store's main contact between purchases, that customer is also far less likely to buy the next vehicle from the same dealership. The forum asks why customers leave and what a dealership can do to keep them. Customers usually give three reasons: price, convenience and trust. Not all of them leave for the same reason, so a dealership first needs to know which group it is losing. Younger owners of inexpensive cars tend to leave over price; busy professionals over convenience; and long-time owners who once had a bad experience over trust. A store's own records can show which owners stopped coming and when, and a short call to a sample of them usually reveals the main reason.

Retention research explains why each reason matters. Bolton (1998) studied customers of a continuous service provider and found that the length of the relationship depended on cumulative satisfaction, with customers weighing recent experiences against their history; poor experiences shortened relationships more than good ones lengthened them. Each service visit is therefore a test the dealership can fail, and a single bad visit after years of good ones can end the relationship. Gustafsson et al. (2005) found that, beyond satisfaction, specific triggers, such as a change in the customer's situation or a critical incident, often precipitated defection. The end of the warranty is exactly such a trigger: the reason to come back to the dealer disappears, and the customer starts comparing.

Price is the first reason. Customers compare a dealer's posted labor rate with an independent shop's and assume the dealer costs more for everything. On complex repairs the dealer's trained technicians and factory tools often justify the rate, but on routine maintenance, such as oil changes, tires, brakes and batteries, many customers see no difference. A value menu that prices common maintenance competitively, with the price posted openly, removes the most visible reason to leave while keeping complex work where the dealer's advantages are real. The dealer also holds an advantage that independents lack: recall and campaign work, which the manufacturer pays for and which brings owners of older vehicles back to the dealer. Every recall visit is a chance to show an owner the value menu and win back routine maintenance.

Convenience is the second reason. Quick-lube shops require no appointment; many dealers book days out. An express lane for maintenance under an hour, online scheduling that shows real open times, extended evening hours and vehicle pickup and delivery can match the convenience of a chain while keeping the customer in the dealership's records, so the next reminder, recall notice or trade-in offer still reaches them.

Trust is the third and hardest reason. Many customers suspect that service departments recommend unnecessary work. Letting customers see the problem for themselves, through a picture or brief clip of the worn component delivered to their phone, lets them judge recommendations without taking the advisor's word for it. Anderson and Sullivan (1993) found that satisfaction depended heavily on whether customers' experiences met or fell short of what they expected, and that falling short weighed more than exceeding expectations. A recommendation the customer can see is one the customer is far less likely to resent.

Measurement holds the plan together. The store should track the share of its own sold vehicles still serviced at three, five and seven years, broken out by model and by the reason recorded when owners say they went elsewhere, and the share of customer-pay repair orders written on post-warranty vehicles, not only total labor sales.

Proverbs 20:23 names two-faced weights and rigged scales among the things the Lord hates (English Standard Version Bible, 2001/2016). A dealership earns post-warranty loyalty the same way merchants once earned trust in the market: by treating the customer's vehicle as honestly as its own.

Reply to Melissa

Melissa, your idea of selling prepaid maintenance plans at the time of purchase may be the strongest single tool for carrying customers past the end of the warranty, because the customer has already paid for future visits and returns to use them. Research on relationship programs supports the logic. Verhoef (2003) followed the customers of a Dutch insurer and showed that relationship-building efforts, including loyalty programs that rewarded continued patronage, were associated with both retention and growth in the share of business customers gave the company. The caution is that a prepaid plan only builds loyalty if the visits it covers are good experiences. Plans also need to be priced so the store does not lose money on each visit, which means modeling how many visits typical owners actually use. A customer who redeems a prepaid oil change and waits three hours may finish the plan and never return. Would you pair the plan with guaranteed appointment times for plan holders?

Reply to Jordan

Jordan, you suggested surveying every service customer and acting on low scores. That is a good start, though research suggests the scores should be read with care. Bloemer and Lemmink (1992) studied car owners and found that satisfaction with the dealer's after-sales service was an important influence on loyalty to the dealer, separate from satisfaction with the car itself. That supports your focus on the service experience. But many dealers notice that manufacturer survey scores can be inflated when advisors ask customers for top ratings, which hides real problems. A short independent survey, sent a few days after the visit and asking whether the customer intends to return, might be more useful than the score alone. Pairing the survey with the store's own retention numbers would show whether high scores actually predict return visits, which is the outcome the store cares about. Have you seen surveys at your store that gave a misleading picture?

References

Anderson, E. W., & Sullivan, M. W. (1993). The antecedents and consequences of customer satisfaction for firms. Marketing Science, 12(2), 125-143. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.12.2.125

Bloemer, J. M. M., & Lemmink, J. G. A. M. (1992). The importance of customer satisfaction in explaining brand and dealer loyalty. Journal of Marketing Management, 8(4), 351-364. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.1992.9964204

Bolton, R. N. (1998). A dynamic model of the duration of the customer's relationship with a continuous service provider: The role of satisfaction. Marketing Science, 17(1), 45-65. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.17.1.45

English Standard Version Bible. (2016). Crossway. (Original work published 2001)

Gustafsson, A., Johnson, M. D., & Roos, I. (2005). The effects of customer satisfaction, relationship commitment dimensions, and triggers on customer retention. Journal of Marketing, 69(4), 210-218. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.2005.69.4.210

Verhoef, P. C. (2003). Understanding the effect of customer relationship management efforts on customer retention and customer share development. Journal of Marketing, 67(4), 30-45. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.67.4.30.18685