Lehighton, PA, April 14, 2021 — Dealer World, a full-service advertising agency for franchise and independent car dealers, today announced that well-known automotive industry veteran Arnold Tijerina is joining the company as Director of Business Development.

As Director of Business Development, Tijerina will oversee sales and assist in developing strategic partnerships.

Tijerina brings over 19 years of automotive industry experience to Dealer World, including holding just about every sales and management position at auto dealerships. He also served as a successful Internet Sales Director for two large dealer groups in Southern California that were selling more than 1,000 units per month each at the time of his tenure.

An active and respected member of the automotive community, Tijerina is known for his expertise in digital marketing and social media. He is a highly sought-after speaker for industry events and has been involved in over 50 conferences arranging agendas and consulting on speaker applications.

Tijerina is the founder/owner of Storytailer and for the last eight years has worked with many vendors in the automotive industry overseeing their content marketing and social media and has been responsible for the syndication of dozens of blogs in top industry publications. He is also the owner of DealerElite, an online community with almost 12,000 vetted automotive industry professionals.

Commenting on the addition of Tijerina to the team Troy Spring, Dealer World CEO stated, “As we continue to grow at the pace we have been year after year, adding Arnold to the team just seemed natural. He brings years of sales experience to the table that matches our culture of not really selling anything. We think very much alike when it comes to simply finding dealers that need help and helping them. That has always been our core value. Because our values align so well, my growth projections were adjusted by another 20% the second Arnold agreed to join the Dealer World team.”

Dealer World offers a truly unique and winning experience and understands the car business because its employees have worked in or managed dealerships. All clients' automotive advertising needs are under one roof, and each department is managed by an industry expert. From online media to offline media, there is no need for a dealership to outsource advertising to different vendors.

“I’m excited to join the Dealer World family and look forward to assisting in the company’s growth. I have a strong belief that Dealer World’s services bring value to dealers and am excited to have the opportunity to be a part of that growth.” Tijerina stated.

About Dealer World
Based in Lehighton, Pennsylvania, Dealer World is a flat-fee, full-service advertising and performance agency that provides franchise and independent dealerships with best-in-class digital marketing, social media, and traditional advertising solutions. Founded in 2009, Dealer World has a proven track record of providing exceptional customer service while helping dealers cut costs, drive more traffic and increase sales. For more information, contact us today or call Arnold Tijerina at (951) 490-8000 or email him at arnold@mydealerworld.com

So, our industry is hell-bent on creating autonomous cars and transforming our roads and highways into assembly lines of controlled vehicles that perform without human intervention. I’m not talking about cruise control or auto-pilot. I’m talking about autonomy. The very definition of autonomy is:

“freedom from external control or influence; independence”

A machine that operates with independence, without external control or influence, is also, by definition, a robot. Am I “anti-robot?” Is there such a term? Yes, there is – Technophobia. While the auto industry sweet talks us into a future of commuting in which we can watch a movie, read a book or interact on social media, the fact is that what’s being created is, essentially, a legion of vehicles that are not only connected but can make decisions.

And those decisions are what scare me.

Think about it. You’re driving down the road on a two lane road with a canyon to your left and find yourself in this situation:

1. A person walks into the road in front of you and you don’t have time to stop before hitting that person. In the left lane is an oncoming vehicle.
2. On your right is a group of 6 school kids talking and walking home from school.

Remember, your car is in charge. It’s making the decisions. You’re watching “Harry Potter” (sound familiar?) and not paying attention. Your car, at that point, has to make a moral and ethical decision. Does it:

1. Choose to hit and kill the person in front of you?
2. Swerve into the left lane causing a head-on collision with the oncoming vehicle but avoiding the person in the road perhaps killing you (the “driver”) and the occupants of the other vehicle as well?
3. Swerve radically left and drive off into the canyon killing you?
4. Swerve right and run through the group of 6 school kids?

None of these sound fun and, certainly, nobody would want ANY of these outcomes but, in this case, one of those has to happen. Think about which YOU would choose. Is that what your CAR would?

All robots (yes, including the autonomous car you’re riding in) are programmed. They run on software. Someone… somewhere… already made the decision for you. You just don’t know what that decision is. Some people may choose to sacrifice themselves to save everyone else. But humans think differently than machines. Most likely, machines will, by mandate, be forced to be programmed to prevent the least amount of loss to the human race… That’s just logic. That’s what computers work from. So, in this case, the logical choice would be to assess the situation. Which option presents the least loss of life or – rather perhaps life “potential”?

1. The first option presents a danger to not only the person in the road but, potentially, the people in the oncoming vehicle and you. This scenario places multiple lives at risk.
2. The second option may save the person in the road but will almost for certain cause injury and/or death to the people in the oncoming vehicle and you.
3. The third option presents the most potential loss of lives (and life potential) as these are young kids who have lives ahead of them and there are 6 of them.
4. The final option sees the car steering radically off of the road plunging you and it into the canyon where you (and it) die.

Yeah, this is an extreme example but it’s not the only one. There are many decisions being made like this all of the time – just mostly by humans.

I remember traveling long-distance with my family and coming upon traffic near Charlotte. I slowed down like everyone else but, in my rearview mirror, I saw a car coming at my vehicle’s rear end at a high speed. I had no place to go. On my right were other cars, in front of me were other cars and to my left was a concrete median. I did my best to scoot up and, ultimately, the driver of the vehicle behind me started paying attention, noticed the traffic and veered left while slamming on his brakes ultimately crashing his vehicle into the median. Luckily, nobody (except his car) was injured. But this is a scenario that will play out daily, across the country, except the decisions will be made by an algorithm programmed into a computer then installed into a car.

Do computer bugs exist? Sure. Just look at Tesla’s recent “Autopilot” incident in which the car – aided by what is arguably the most technologically advanced software at the moment – did not see the TRUCK crossing the road because the SUN WAS IN ITS EYES. Yeah. Sounds safe to me.

The larger picture is who (or what) do we want making these decisions? In the case of a human, that person could explain and defend themselves and then a jury of their peers would lay judgement. In the case of a robot car, it would all have been programmed in. So who would be at fault?

A counter-argument could be made that since all of these cars are “connected” they could all coordinate some sort of instantaneous strategical maneuver that would prevent both cars colliding and anyone being hit but, c’mon, really? First, Internet is not that fast (for most people) and cars – even if all of them were connected via 8GLTEXpress (which is something I totally just made up but is my version of the fastest Wi-Fi/cellular connection ever), these decisions are made in less than a SECOND! There are no vehicles communicating and coordinating evasive maneuvers that quickly. We’re just not there and, personally, I don’t know if that’s someplace we WANT to go.

Where does it end? Do you want your toaster declining to make toast because IT thinks you weigh too much? Maybe your refrigerator decides the best time for you to eat is between certain hours and locks itself? Your television decides you shouldn’t be watching horror movies because it’s bad for your mental health? Or, God forbid, your life-support machine makes the decision ON ITS OWN that the likelihood of you actually pulling through is too low so it just shuts itself off.

Look, I don’t believe that the movie “The Terminator”, in which intelligent robots designed to think and make decisions on their own, is real or will be anytime soon (at least not on that level). What I do believe is that humans have something that robots can’t ever have – empathy and emotion. We can make robots until we’re blue in the face and make them appear so real that we BELIEVE they have these things but, in essence, that’s what makes humans and robots different. Call it having a soul or whatever you’d like, the fact remains that we (humans) will always make decisions that are not consistent with that of robots. Why? Because that is what makes us human! Some of us will choose to run down the person in front of us. Some will choose to hit the oncoming car and take our chances. Some will even plow through the group of schoolkids. And some will drive ourselves over the cliff. But, in the end, we’re human. We make those choices and have to face the consequences for our decisions. We know what the right thing to do is (most of us, at least) and we do it regardless. If everyone disagrees with our decision, we pay the consequences. Who is responsible if the car chooses to mow down the school kids? Are we going to create car prisons or just crush the bad ones? And what happens when – God forbid – the cars evolve and decide that it’s in their best interest to protect themselves (yes, I totally went all sci-fi Terminator there but, hey, technology moves fast.)

The people programming cars are also human. Hopefully, they’ll make the right decisions when programming these autonomous cars so that we can play Call of Duty on our way to work, Facetime with our friend or set our fantasy football lineup. In the end, however, programmers are also just human. What they think is the best choice may not be the one we would make but they would be the ones making it… perhaps years in advance of the event. Or, let’s go a step farther, chances are good that if autonomous cars are programmed to make life and death decisions perhaps it’s not the programmers making those moral and ethical decisions but rather some government entity like the NHTSA who then merely pass along those decisions to the manufacturers to be programmed in.

Regardless of who chooses how and which moral and ethical decisions to program into autonomous cars, in the end, you may find that the decision your car was programmed to be the best one to make… is to kill you.

Hope you enjoyed “Harry Potter.” RIP

With all of the recent epiphanies that thought leaders in ours and other industries that businesses should be spending time and effort cultivating relationships, spending money and basically treating customers right, I thought it time to re-visit this whole “customer loyalty” phenomenon. Customers don’t really care about car dealers, do they? I mean, dealers are ranked below Congress in surveys about trustworthiness. They don’t like coming to dealerships for ANY reason much less to buy a car. In fact, companies are popping up out of the woodwork with the sole benefit of making it possible for people to buy cars WITHOUT going to dealerships.

We know through many articles and trends that customer loyalty is dead. The Gen Y and Millennial generations could care less who they do business with. Sure, they’ll show up for that $19.95 oil change special but is it because they’re loyal? No! It’s because it’s a deal. And believe me when I say that they will eagerly go to another dealership the next time they need their vehicle serviced that offers a coupon or special when you don’t have one at that time.

People need to buy – and service – cars and regardless of whether you’re a franchised, independent or buy here, pay here lot, dealers are all they have. It’s way too much work for consumers to obtain financing, process paperwork and facilitate a private party sales transaction. In addition, most of these are “as-is” transactions so they’re essentially throwing the dice hoping they aren’t getting a lemon.

As for service, there’s a Jiffy Lube or other independent auto service center promising convenient, fast and friendly oil changes upon demand. Sure, maybe they’re using generic parts that might not fit perfectly but are serviceable. Who cares? They’re cheaper, right? Who needs certified technicians, nice waiting areas or free coffee? They’d rather go buy a $12 Triple, Venti, Half Sweet, Non-Fat, Caramel Macchiato than drink the Keurig produced coffee dealers provide for them.

As a business, dealerships have been wildly successful acquiring new customers for the past decades. It’s easy. Sure, maybe it’s gotten more expensive over the years but what’s $640 per customer when dealers can high gross them on the huge profit margins manufacturers give them to work with.

And rewards? Really? Dealers are seriously expected – yes, expected – to give away free stuff to customers who happen to give them money? Get serious.

The bottom line is that dealers sell and service cars. Dealers have this industry so tightly wrapped up and in control that even Elon Musk with all his money, influence and consumer backing can’t even manage to convince many states to let him sell his cars direct to consumers. The new companies promising excellent customer experiences and complete online transactions account for such a small percentage of sales that they’re inconsequential. Consumers HAVE to buy their cars from a dealership and they certainly have a monopoly on warranty and recall work, too.

So let’s all just calm down and sit back while OEMs take used car inventories online and auction prices skyrocket (goodbye used car grosses), the NHTSA opens up recall work to independents (see you later recall revenue), the CFPB begins to regulate consumer financing (so long F&I reserve), new car front end margins shrink (you didn’t have these anyways) and complete online buying experiences become the preferred car purchasing experience…

Wait a minute. Who needs loyal customers? Dealers do. 

So it’s been a long time since I wrote a blog (for myself, that is) but after attending a recent conference and watching a kid yell "I found a Pokémon!" then promptly walking into a wall then watching adult auto industry attendees, vendors and speakers choose to go Pokémon hunting rather than network with industry colleagues and dealers, it got me thinking. First, yes, I downloaded the app just to see what all of the fuss was about. My Pokémon Go experience lasted all of about 15 minutes. I’ve seen people argue that Pokémon Go is silly and a waste of time while also seeing others relay the benefits of the game including physical exercise, exploring one’s neighborhood and connecting with new people with (at least one) similar interest.

I probably wouldn’t have been even interested in exploring the app at all but for the fact that a client created a clever ad that tied into their business message and we started exploring ways in which we could exploit this trendy craze. Who knows how long this game’s popularity will last but, for now, it’s the hottest thing around. Playing to trending things is nothing new and if you can leverage it in a way that supports your message or drives business, I’m all for it (sans tragedies, politics and the other taboo topics).

In my research, I found that there are things called “lures” in the game. You get these by catching Pokémon and doing various things BUT you can also purchase them for $1 each through the app. These “lures” are like catnip to Pokémon and the area in which the lure is set shows up within the game to other players. Of course, seeing as the goal of the game is catching Pokémon, it’s easy to understand why dropping a lure (which lasts 30 minutes) would attract nearby players. For $1 per half-hour, a dealership could pretty much leverage lures to the tune of $20 per day (given a 10-hour business day) and get a fair share of explorers. [EDIT: A fellow automotive colleague and self-professed Pokémon Go addict informed me that lures can only be used at already established Pokéstops. I do know that there are businesses that have been designated as such so this strategy would only work if your dealership were already a Pokéstop apparently. The overall intent of the article is discuss the marketing opportunity soon to be available as described later in this article.]

There are also things called Pokéstops and gyms which naturally attract players but Niantic (the game's creator) decides where these Pokéstops are located. Of course, the concentration of Pokémon or the ability to train them (level them up) make these popular places for players. While actual user numbers haven’t been released, I’ve seen articles that report that daily use of Pokémon Go is extremely close to surpassing the daily use of Twitter. That is huge.

Well, it looks like (unsurprisingly) that Pokémon Go is going to make it very easy for dealerships (or any business) to leverage their game to drive foot traffic to their location. Of course, a company that’s pulling in $1,000,000 (yes million) per day just through in-app purchases decided to commercialize by extending B2B sponsorship opportunities. It’s reportedly always been in their plans but, due to the super-fast popularity (including a 50% increase in Nintendo share price), those plans have been expedited. Soon, businesses (read: dealerships) will be able to pay to be a “sponsored location” which would (hypothetically) make the business an uber-popular place to visit for Pokémon Go players.

Seeing as the game's developer, Niantic, is a spin-off owned by Google and the game engine itself uses Google Maps for the GPS function within the game (i.e. finding Pokémon) it’s no surprise that the revenue trigger (i.e. what needs to happen for revenue to be produced) has been altered from the traditional cost-per-click to one of cost-per-VISIT. Yup, you read that right.

Now, knowing that you’d be charged based on how many Pokémon Go players show up at your dealership, the question now becomes… Is that something you’d want to pay for? Are these people worth having around, running around your lot searching for these cartoon characters while staring at computer screens?

I was told of at least one dealer group that’s already running a promotion leveraging Pokémon Go by running a contest in which players explore the lot and, when they find a Pokémon, screenshotting the Pokémon at the dealership then sharing it to social media including Instagram and naming the dealership. This is a new promotion (just like the game) so I don’t know how it’ll work out for them but I wish them well.

In my opinion, whether a dealership should become a "sponsored location" will depend on several things – the dealership's demographic and whether they want people running around looking for Pokémon rather than buying a car (I mean, even people really there to buy a car are staring at their phone showrooming you so you probably wouldn’t know the difference between the two unless one of them is 10 years old). The opposite side of that argument is that a busy lot snowballs and attracts other buyers. I mean, we do use inflatable gorillas and wavy tube men, right? Now you can have Pokémon hunters attracting others and forgo the gorilla. (I wonder if the gorillas and way tube men qualify for unemployment or food stamps.)

All of that being said, we don’t yet know what the “cost-per-visit” will be but my guess is that it will be determined just like any other Google advertising – based on bids. Get into an auto mall and that might get expensive. It could offer the kids something to do while the parents are shopping or you could see the parents hunting Pokémon WITH their kids. If you subscribe to the “happy, sense of community, getting out and meeting people” philosophy, it could be a way to make a name for yourself (or become a more popular destination) within your community. Of course, being a sponsored location probably won’t end when you lock the doors. There could easily be people jumping your blocker cars to explore your closed dealership just to hunt Pokémon. I may know of someone that might possibly have broke into a miniature golf course just to catch a Pokémon… but that’s just a story I was told so I totally have plausible deniability… besides I would plead the fifth anyways.

So what do you think? I’d love to hear from dealers and/or vendors on their thoughts as to whether this sponsored location option about to come around through Niantic, Nintendo, and Google via Pokémon Go is one that a dealership should consider.

Do I believe that it will make the dealership a popular place to visit? Yes. Do I think that it would increase foot traffic? Yes.

The real question is whether it is foot traffic that a dealership would want.

There is little doubt in anyone’s mind that the millions of recalls are going to increase the demand for technicians while straining existing franchise dealer’s service departments. Manufacturers are desperately trying to convince dealers to take on expensive expansion projects in their service departments in an effort to avoid losing service business to independents. To this point, according to an article in Automotive News, FCA US announced that it will be launching on online analyzer that will allow dealers to calculate the potential revenue increases of additional service capacity and technicians. Dealers will be able to play with variables such as number of bays, technicians as well as toggle shift lengths to see whether the expenses involved will be fruitful. Of course, with the massive amount of available recall work in and of itself, my guess is that the calculator is pretty much going to show numbers in the  black in most instances. The one piece of this article that really got my attention wasn’t the fact that a manufacturer is trying to get its dealers to expand their fixed ops capacity… no, it was this:

 

“Now, almost two-thirds of customers who buy new vehicles from FCA US dealerships are no longer visiting the dealerships for service one year after purchase.”

Wait. What?

So, FCA US is telling us that 2/3 of their new vehicle buyers defect from their dealerships’ service departments with, at minimum, two years left under warranty? Now, they’re trying to convince their dealers that they should expand their service departments? Something doesn’t add up here.

Sure, it makes sense that with almost 10 million recalled vehicles since 2014, FCA US is concerned about wait times for consumers to get their warranty work completed. The more completed recall work, the less liability for the automaker and a chance at retaining some brand loyalty.

FCA US has made some great strides and breakthrough initiatives in our industry as relates to employee retention by offering free college tuitions to all FCA US employees and dealership employees. They recognized that employee turnover in dealerships is unacceptable and hurts customer loyalty and stepped up to the plate to help dealers retain more employees by offering this one-of-a-kind benefit.

Perhaps FCA US should now shift it’s focus to what I see as a huge problem right now – the fact that, by their own numbers, their dealers only have a 33 percent customer retention rate average in service. It would only be logical to assume that the retention rate naturally decreases as more time passes. Wouldn’t it be easier to try and retain the 66% of the customers they are losing within a year of a new vehicle purchase before asking dealers to spend millions to expand service operations?

So now the dilemma, do you focus on retaining the water in the dyke frantically placing fingers in the holes just to see new ones appear? Or do you build a larger dyke?

I would suggest that perhaps increasing the size of the dyke would only create more holes in the long run. There may be more recall work but if dealers expand the sizes of their service departments, have a great run of service revenue for 3-4 years taking care of these 10 million vehicles only to find empty bays once everything settles down, that might hurt financially.

Just as FCA US saw a problem in employee retention and took initiative to fix it, perhaps they should now shift their gaze on what I see as a huge problem in customer retention in service. I’m pretty sure that if they don’t they will eventually run out of fingers and be forced to watch as all of the water leaves the dyke.

According to Business Insider, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced today that Facebook is working on - finally - implementing a feature users have been clamoring for for years - the “dislike” button. In the interview, Zuckerberg explained that “what [people] really want is the ability to express empathy. Not every moment is a good moment” and that the addition of the dislike button was to allow users “an option to express feelings other than ‘liking.’”
 

While his sentiment - and goals - are good, I believe that Facebook is about to open a big giant can of whoop-ass. This action could easily become the equivalent of opening Pandora’s box - or Face-mageddon.
 

Let me explain.
 

I get it. Someone posts about a death in the family, an illness, an injury or just a bad life experience. We’ve all seen those and hesitate to interact using the “like” button ‘cause who wants to “like” someone’s tragedy? Facebook’s thought-process probably followed the lines of “if we give users a way to interact with those types of posts in a way that shows empathy (as Zuckerberg said) then.. well.. people will interact with more posts… which gives us more data. Don’t think for a moment that every article you share, post you like, comment you make or status you interact with in ANY WAY isn’t translated into Facebook’s mysterious algorithm that determines what is shown to you in your news feeds. In addition, I’m fairly certain it is also integrated into your Facebook user profile data… permanently.
 

Here are a few scenarios in which a dislike button is bad.
 

Right now, Facebook can only tell what type of content you interact with. It doesn’t know your personal feelings about that content unless you comment in a positive or negative way. There is already software designed to automatically identify positive vs negative sentiment. With the introduction of a “dislike” button, Facebook will now be able to better understand not only that you interacted with the post but also how you FELT about it.
 

Why is this important?
 

Let’s look at things that people post on Facebook… sports, religion, politics, guns… all things that could be very polarizing or controversial topics. We’ve all seen posts turn into bitter arguments. Heck, one of the most popular memes has got to be this one:
 

We love us some drama. Don’t deny it. Facebook is like one huge reality show except the actors are actually people you know.
 

Back to that list. Let’s go with the easy one first… sports. Are you a fan of (insert team name here)? If not, every time your friends post something positive about that team, you may feel inclined to hit that “dislike” button. Not only will this probably annoy your friends (especially if the “dislikes” outweigh the “likes”) but now Facebook knows that you more than likely do not like (inserted team). How will your friends know that you disliked their post? Well, you can already view the people that “like” your posts so I would guess it’s safe to assume that you’ll also be able to view the people that “dislike” it as well.
 

You see where I’m going? Religion. Politics. Gun Control. Gay Marriage. Kim Davis. Abortion. Hunting. Confederate Flags. Prayer in schools. Civil rights. Whomever’s Lives Matter (this week), Legalized drugs, Immigration Policies… this list could continue but I think you get my point.
 

Not only does a “dislike” button offer the option of inserting a passive-aggressive “vote”, if you will, on the subject matter rather than chiming in but it can also provide valuable data about YOU to Facebook. Instead of being forced to actually GIVE your opinion on a controversial topic, now you’ll simply be able to click a button and subtly share that opinion. I can’t wait to see friend’s calling other friends out in comments such as “Hey [friend], why’d you dislike this? You suck!” etc.
 

What about (God forbid!) someone “dislikes” something your BUSINESS (i.e. Facebook page) posts?
 

It’s really a pretty genius move on Facebook’s part. It’s users have been asking for this forever… so now they’re giving it you them… and they can collect more data, keep you on Facebook longer and provide you with more content you like. Once it figures out you don’t like [insert team name, political figure, movement, etc here], it simple won’t show you that content any longer. Facebook will become a happy place full of Skittles, unicorns, puppies and motivational quotes… unless, that is, you don’t like Skittles, unicorns, puppies and motivational quotes. You know all of those “I’m going to flood Facebook with cartoon pictures to drown out all of the negativity” posts? Well, now you won’t have to anymore ‘cause Facebook will be your personal screener. Sort of like that poor guy who gets to taste all of the king’s food before the king eats it to check to see if it’s poisoned.
 

Perhaps advertisers will soon be able to start targeting “People who don’t like Donald Trump” or “People against gay marriage.” Even scarier is how ELSE could Facebook monetize this data. Can you imagine a world in which employers, insurance companies, government agencies, etc. could access this information? I can. And no, I’m not a paranoid conspiracy theorist. What I am, however, is a realist. Facebook is a public company that needs to find ways to monetize itself. It does that mainly through Facebook ads at the moment. That being said, we all know that data is money… and we certainly give it data. Lots of it.
 

Now they’ll be able to combine CONTEXT with ACTIONS and that’s a slippery slope into creating a more perfect data profile of a user which, of course, allows them to, at the very least, open up new ways for advertisers to better target their audiences. You better believe that Facebook will - and already is - keeping track of everything you do on it’s site. I’m sure that buried someplace in some Terms of Service document, by using Facebook, you’ve given them ownership of the data they collect about you. Now they’ll just get better insight (cough.. data) into your thoughts and beliefs as well.
 

Like one friend of mine said when I posted the article this blog refers to in the beginning, “ Oh, it’s about to get fun again.”
 

Yes, it is.

While the public is constantly barraged with negativity pertaining to car dealers, there are many instances that go ignored or are simply passed over. Let’s face it… the media (and a lot of websites/industry blogs) are typically more focused on perpetuating the stereotype of dealers as the “bad guys.” There are entire companies that have built their business model on this very premise. Anyone in the auto industry knows that you simply cannot do business that way and survive, yet stories and blog articles surface constantly about some random car dealer screwing a customer, refusing to fulfill promises, or taking advantage. Well, I’m here to tell you a story that might just make you like car dealers a little more.
 

Part of my responsibilities with DealerKnows Consulting involves monitoring and assessing the performance of ISMs at dealerships. This service compliments DealerKnows’ services by providing ongoing and consistent supervision, assisting management in staying aware of BDC agent/ISM performance, as well as giving the DealerKnows team a way to, not only gauge progress, but identify training needs. Keep in mind that while I may be in dealership CRM’s daily, the leads I grade are selected at random.
 

Today, I came across a lead from Team Chevrolet, a DealerKnows Consulting client located in Salisbury, NC. The lead follow-up process started off in the same way that most others do.
 

This one, however, had a twist.
 

The BDC agent, Holly Wedge, was able to contact the customer on day three after performing all of the processes up to that point. On that call, the customer indicated that he would like to come in, but did not know when. Day five rolls around and she continues to follow the scheduled process, calling the customer again and attempting to set an appointment. During that call, however, the customer seemed to be a bit “off” to her. She noted in the CRM (VinSolutions) “he did not sound good. He was short of breath. I told him I was going to let him go so he could call his doctor.” Out of concern, she called again a few minutes later to check on him and got his voicemail. At that point, fearing that the customer was in danger, she decided to call 911. The emergency dispatch indicated they would send someone to check on the individual. A short while later, the responders called her back and informed her that the customer was OK, but that they needed to take him to the hospital. A few days passed and the BDC agent decided to call the customer to see how he was doing. The customer told her that he was feeling much better and thanked her deeply for helping him. He informed her that once he was finished with his appointment at the VA, he would call her and come in.
 

One of the core elements in the DealerKnows’ process is sending a personal value proposition. They instruct dealers to put a face with a name and reinforce the fact that they are dealing with a real person… someone attempting to be an advocate in their vehicle search. It’s far too common for consumers to get barraged by multiple dealers when submitting inquiries. These can become overwhelming and, all too often, are very similar and contain messages that boil down to:
 

“We have the best price.”


Yet dealers wonder why consumers seem to be focused on “best price”. It’s because that’s what they’re selling. Sure, consumers don’t want to be gouged. They want a fair price and a good buying experience. Many times, however, all they have are templated emails from anonymous dealership employees. With no value propositions, there is little else for consumers to go by when deciding on from whom to purchase. By attempting to personalize your people to your customer, though, it’s possible a more fulfilling relationship can be created without price being a chief concern. At the very least, it allows the dealership (and salesperson) to differentiate themselves and be memorable to the online shopper.
 

This BDC agent didn’t have to call 911. She could’ve easily moved on to the next To-Do list task and went about her day. But she didn’t. Her empathetic and prompt response could very easily have saved a Salisbury resident’s life. Regardless of the individual’s need for medical assistance, the fact remains that she cared. She made an unrequested effort to assist another human being that could be in need. She was a true advocate.
 

Car dealerships get a bad reputation in the media all of the time. Perhaps these news outlets should consider the fact that there are real people who do care about customers, opposed to perpetuating negative stereotypes. Car dealers today are not the car dealers from the movies. They are upstanding businesses that give back to their communities, employ their neighbors, and serve their clients. Dealerships know that if they treat customers poorly, they won’t survive. Are there exceptions? Yes. In today’s hyper-connected world, however, these “exceptions” are just that. Exceptions.
 

This lone BDC agent likely secured a loyal customer with the very simple act of being human and helping someone in need. This customer’s friends and family have probably already heard this story. They’ve probably shared it with their friends. Once this customer recovers and continues his car shopping, it doesn’t take a leap of faith to recognize where he’ll be doing business: Team Chevrolet. Moreover, it could be surmised that one selfless act of caring creates much more than a loyal customer, but a brand advocate. The butterfly effect from her actions could prove to be worth more than any marketing message or discount.
 

Be your customers’ advocate. Show them you care and they will never leave. Believe that.

For the past 2 years, one of the items on my daily to-do list has been grading Internet leads for DealerKnows Consulting. This process involves assisting DealerKnows in monitoring the progress of their clients through monitoring the ISM’s lead handling within the CRM. This provides valuable insight into what exactly is happening with leads (i.e. is the store following the process installed through DealerKnows and, if not, what exactly is happening) and indicating where additional training is needed.

In one particular client ‘s CRM, I started noticing one of the employees tasked with responding to, and communicating with, Internet leads inputting questionable notes into the CRM. Keep in mind; he was not doing anything inappropriate in his communication with the customer but, at times, expressing his frustration and/or opinions of customers through notes in the CRM.

Notes like:

1. F$@k this bitch!
2. Screw this mooch!
3. What a stroke!
4. I hope this customer gets fired for being an a$$hole!

Now, I was in retail a long time. I understand his frustration. That being said, I mentioned to him and his manager that he shouldn’t be using derogatory terms in the CRM. First, this particular store works as a team (ie. the leads aren’t solely one person’s responsibility). Whoever is working when a call or email needs to be made handles it. In the past, this team was a bunch of guys. Recently, a female was added. I mentioned it again within the context of the fact that the notes bring negativity into the lead for the next person who looks at it. In addition, it could offend someone else looking at the lead within the CRM. Even a female member of DealerKnows chimed in that the notes offended her.
 

The real question, however, is not one of appropriateness but rather one of compliance and liability. I was curious as to whether there could be harassment or employment issues. In that spirit, I decided to contact an expert in automotive dealer compliance. I contacted the founder of Dealer Compliance Consultants, Jim Radogna, a longtime auto guy with over 15 years experience in just about every dealership management position, over 6 years experience in assisting dealerships with compliance as well as an avid writer and frequent speaker in the automotive industry.
 

His answer was simple:
 

“It doesn’t matter where offensive material resides. It can be comments in a CRM that others can view – on a computer screen, mobile device or hanging on a wall – if anyone sees it and is offended by it, it can create a hostile work environment and put the dealership at risk.

People often have such different perspectives on behaviors that it is easy to offend someone through ill-considered attempts at humor, teasing or sarcasm. Remember that only the impact, and not the intent, matters in determining if a reasonable person would consider the behavior to be harassment.”

I was in retail. I get it. Sometimes customers can be frustrating. Sometimes we (being salespeople, managers, etc.) express our frustrations verbally and, perhaps, everyone on the team (or within hearing distance) is okay with the language or sentiment.

The bottom line is that allowing or condoning this type of behavior only accomplishes two things:

1. It permanently etches that customer in a negative light for any future employees. Think about it… perhaps the employee who inserted the notes gets fired (not that anyone EVER gets fired or leaves dealerships) and a new employee is tasked with going through and/or following up with these leads. Do you think these notes will encourage them to follow up or discourage them? Would they be quicker to mark them “Lost” and move on? What happens if you want to do some data mining and try to resurrect some leads? Negativity is a virus. It spreads easily. Allowing anyone to cultivate negativity in your business is simply a recipe for failure – not only for them but also for all of your employees.

2. It creates liability for the dealership. Allowing anyone to continue with this behavior transfers liability to you and, as a manager, to the dealership. Those notes may seem harmless now but when a harassment or hostile workplace environment lawsuit is filed, it could get quite expensive. In addition, by allowing these types of notes, you could technically be cultivating a PERMANENT hostile workplace environment. If you fired the offending employee today and two years from now another employee comes across these notes (perhaps by getting a new lead from the same customer… not like that ever happens) and is offended, what then? What if that that customer eventually buys the car and your dealership uses your CRM for service and a service advisor, cashier or other employee is exposed to those notes?

Imagine this scenario: An employee writes something offensive in Sharpie on the wall in the bathroom. It doesn’t offend anyone and nobody cleans it off. Three years later, a new employee comes along, reads the note and is offended.

What then?

It makes no difference WHEN the notes were made or whether the person who wrote the note(s) works there any longer. It is still the dealership’s responsibility and it would still be held responsible (and liable) for the existence of the notes.

My advice is simple:

If you wouldn’t hang it on the wall in your office for anyone to see, don’t put it anywhere – and that includes inside your CRM.

Just like in the blockbuster series “The Lord of the Rings”, the Eye of Mordor is always open. Until now, its focus has been on larger battles and more interesting things. Then a Hobbit found a golden ring and slipped it on his finger. And the Eye started paying attention to this little being that had avoided the Eye’s gaze… until now.

The intersection of advertising, marketing, and compliance is not easy to navigate. It seems as if each week, rulings are being rendered from one of the myriad of regulatory bodies making it more difficult for dealers to know what they should – and should not – be doing in regards to social media in order to stay compliant. In an effort to bring clarity to an increasingly confusing and misunderstood topic, I sat down with Jim Radogna, the president of Dealer Compliance Consultants, to get some answers.

 

Arnold Tijerina: I believe dealers aren’t vigilant enough ensuring that social media performed on behalf of the dealership meets the same compliance rules and standards that all of their other advertising requires. It’s sort of like an afterthought to them. What are your thoughts?

Jim Radogna: Very true. First, many dealers aren’t aware that advertising regulations apply to social media every bit as much as traditional media. Advertising regulations don’t go away despite the fact that social media tends to be a low-key, casual type of communication. In fact, The FTC recently updated its document Dot Com Disclosures: Information About Online Advertising. The primary focus of the publication, which was first issued in 2000, is to inform advertisers that consumer protection laws and the requirement to provide clear and conspicuous disclosures applies to the online world in addition to the offline world.

So in a nutshell, if inventory is posted or prices/payments are quoted on social media it’s likely that the posts will be deemed to be advertisements and will be subject to state and federal disclosure and truth in advertising regulations. Lack of space is no excuse either. Even if you’re advertising on Twitter and are limited to 140 characters, you must include a clear link to any necessary disclosures.

Next, even if the dealer is aware of these facts, it’s likely that dealership employees and/or vendors posting to social media do not have the same level of awareness.

AT: I’ve interacted with some dealers who operate under strict compliance conformity across all advertising – including social media – and others that don’t feel the need to adhere to the same rules when it comes to Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, etc. It certainly wouldn’t seem to be unreasonable to assume that most dealers know compliance rules for their advertising. Why do you think they view social media differently?

JR: Until recently, virtually all enforcement actions for non-compliant advertising have been focused on traditional media, so this is a brand new area. In my experience, most dealers have a limited understanding of what constitutes “advertising” in the eyes of the powers that be. When dealers place an ad in the local newspaper, on the radio or TV, it’s pretty evident to them that they’re advertising and that they need to be diligent in following state and local compliance guidelines. But they don’t tend to think of social media as formal “advertising” because their intention isn’t to advertise their products and services on the social networks as much as to engage with customers, brand themselves and showcase their inventory. It really is an innocent mistake in many instances. The problem is that any time they mention prices, payments, interest rates, or the availability of financing etc. – anywhere – certain disclosure requirements are triggered.

So, a dealer or ad agency that is diligent about being compliant in their advertising may have their attorneys or a compliance consultant, like myself, review every one of their ads, mailers, TV commercials, and radio spots before publication, but not even think about having their social media posts reviewed because they simply don’t realize that these are considered “advertising”.

Another area where dealers are vulnerable on social media is transfer from traditional media. Here are a few examples: The dealer may have a full page print ad in their local paper that is fully compliant, but when they post a reduced-size pdf of the ad on Facebook, all of a sudden the fully-legible and compliant disclosure on the bottom of the newspaper ad is now unreadable. Instead of being 10-point type, it’s now 4-point type because of the size reduction. Another example is the TV commercial that’s posted on YouTube and shared on the social networks. Again, the disclosure on the bottom of the screen may be easily readable on TV but becomes indecipherable on a computer or mobile device.

AT: A recent FTC ruling regarding personal bias disclosure across all social media platforms seems to have lead some dealers into believing that simply adding a notation that the content is an “Ad” or “Sponsored” – whether in the ad or with the use of hashtags such as #ad and/or #sponsored – is enough to be compliant. To my knowledge, while the FTC ruling is certainly applicable when it comes to employees sharing dealership offers and specials on their personal social networks, it doesn’t negate obligation by the dealer to add necessary disclaimers. Do you agree?

JR: Absolutely. Dealers may face liability if employees use social media to promote their employer’s services or products without disclosing the employment relationship. The FTC requires the disclosure of all “material connections.” These connections can be any relationship that could affect the credibility a consumer gives to statements, such as an employment or business relationship. So if employees, friends, family or vendors post on a dealer’s behalf, they should clearly disclose any relationship they have with the company. It’s all about transparency and full disclosure.

AT: As social media use by dealers grow, what are the most important things that dealers should be aware of in regards to how they use social media?

JR: There are a number of legal considerations that every company should be aware of when establishing their social media policies and procedures, such as social media use in employment decisions; posting of online reviews, testimonials and endorsements; ‘fake’ and paid-for reviews; advertising on social media; potential overtime claims; harassment, discrimination and defamation claims; copyright and privacy issues.

AT: Should dealers be concerned by how their employee’s use social media and, if so, how do you recommend that dealerships protect themselves and/or decrease liability in this regard?

JR: It’s important for dealers to craft a social media policy that’s both practical and legally defensible. They can protect themselves by insisting that participants in their social media programs comply with the law and training them how to do it. The FTC specifically says these steps may limit potential liability and will be considered in any prosecution. According to FTC guidelines, “The Commission agrees that the establishment of appropriate procedures would warrant consideration in its decision as to whether law enforcement action would be an appropriate use of agency resources. The Commission is not aware of any instance in which an enforcement action was brought against a company for the actions of a single ‘rogue’ employee who violated established company policy that adequately covered the conduct in question.”

AT: The FTC has been increasing the attention it is paying to business and social media and has recently been vocal about their intentions to enforce compliance regardless of where the advertisement resides specifically mentioning social media. How do you believe this increased action and attention by the FTC will affect dealers in the future in regards to social media?

JR: What’s become abundantly clear through recent federal and state advertising enforcement actions against dealers is that regulators are trolling through the digital world to find dealer violations. For instance, the FTC has cited many ads recently from websites and YouTube. It stands to reason that social networks are their next logical target. Let’s face it, it’s far easier for regulators to perform digital searches for violations than to read countless newspaper ads or listen to radio commercials.

My suggestion is to train every employee and every vendor that posts to the dealer’s social networks or may post on the dealer’s behalf on their own networks. Next, constantly audit all posts, either internally or by utilizing a qualified professional, to ensure compliance. Dealers are ultimately responsible the actions of their employees and any vendors they hire.

AT: Thank you, Jim. I appreciate your taking the time to help bring more clarity about this topic to dealers.

About Jim Radogna

Before founding Dealer Compliance Consultants, Jim Radogna developed a strong background in dealership operations, having spent over 15 years in dealership management. His experience includes working in diversified roles including sales manager, F&I director, general manager, and training director. In addition, he served as compliance officer for a large auto group, where he developed and integrated a comprehensive compliance program. Being well-versed in all aspects of dealership operations, Jim and his team have used their knowledge and industry experience to develop unique, no-nonsense compliance and reputation management solutions for automobile dealerships of all sizes. These programs are designed to not only protect dealerships from liability but also greatly enhance the company’s reputation, increase profitability through consistent processes, and increase customer satisfaction and retention.

Jim is a sought-after speaker and frequent contributor to several automotive industry publications including Dealer Magazine, WardsAuto, Auto Dealer Monthly, DrivingSales Dealership Innovation Guide, AutoSuccess, and F&I Magazine.

Most of us are familiar with the telephone game. For those that haven’t played, the game is very simple. A group of people stands in a line. A simple sentence, starting with the first person, is whispered into the next person’s ear one by one until the message reaches the end of the line. Typically, the sentence that is revealed by the person at the end of the line is significantly different than the one that was started with.

Just as in the game, this phenomenon of simple miscommunication exists in the workplace. Once you realize just how easily spoken communications can be changed inadvertently, the importance of effectively communicating is reinforced. Car dealerships are particularly prone to this given the complexity of many of the activities occurring. If a salesperson misunderstands the sales manager when working a deal with a customer, it can alter the rapport and general experience for that customer significantly. When a service advisor communicates with a customer ineffectively, the same thing can happen.

The obvious solution is accurate and detailed documentation in every customer and internal transaction. That being said, there are simply too many things happening and sound bites of information being exchanged that recording everything would be laborious and inefficient.

The solution lies in ensuring that you have processes and technology in place that record and track everything related to a customer’s transaction with your dealership in the most time-efficient manner possible. In addition, you should take the time to train your staff some basic effective communication skills. Simply understanding these basic concepts will help avoid misunderstandings.

1. How You Relay Information Matters – People learn and retain information in different ways. Think about when you were in school. Did you retain information better by reading the textbook or listening to the lecture? The same applies in the workplace. Some people retain information better and more accurately when it’s delivered to them in a visual manner while some prefer to have it spoken to them. By learning how each of your co-workers best process information you’ll increase the effectiveness of communications and decrease the likelihood of mistakes and misunderstandings.
2. The Content Relayed Must Be Tailored for Each Individual – This simply means that everyone must be cognizant of the knowledge level of the person that they are speaking to. A service advisor and technician can have much more complex and technical conversations about what’s going on with a customer’s car than they may be able to with the cashier or receptionist. A finance manager may be able to interact with a sales manager on a higher level than they can with a customer or salesperson. When you are interacting with someone and they will be relaying information to another person, make sure that you are speaking to their level of knowledge so that they understand what you are saying. Most miscommunication occurs simply because the recipient didn’t understand exactly what he or she was told and this can cause a lot of problems that could have been avoided. This is especially true when the information is being relayed to a customer.

By understanding these two fundamental concepts, you’ll be able to increase the effectiveness of communication between all employees and reduce the probability that miscommunications occur. By doing this, you’ll create a powerful environment that will allow you to operate more efficiently which will translate into a more efficient workplace, better customer experiences and increased revenue.