NACE, Direction, Leadership… etc.

Posted on 16. Jul, 2008 by biggs in Biggs Articles, Body Shop Advocate, Collision Industry News, Industry Op-Eds

We the unwilling have been doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have been doing so much for so long, we are now qualified to do anything with nothing! ~Anon~

Perhaps civility, professionalism and decorum is unreasonable in today’s world. I would like to think otherwise. Some people have more brass than most, but a kind word and remembering that others have feeling too can go a long way in creating consensus and building a team or coalition where and when we need it. I may be wrong, but I am betting most that continually complain would like to see more accomplished to the positive than just gritching. If that is the case, we all must use some tact to attract others we will need in this fight. Did we not learn anything by the missteps of unilateralism?

Is it too much to ask of each other to appreciate the efforts and sincerity of others whilst we disagree with them? We can disagree even with passion, but we should leave room for dissent or we have some sort of dictatorship and autocracy … None of us will put up with that. We all have pride and should be treated with equal respect even and perhaps most especially when we disagree! Otherwise, we stop the dialog and scatter the few friends we might have had.

Aside form the civility issues, I agree totally with the fact leaders must have thicker skin and not be so sensitive to every little criticism. I once said “NACE was not so nace anymore” on a public bbs. I was called an a##hole by a person that eventually became my employee, and was ostracized by ASA, NACE, etc. That is the ASA technique of shunning you. If they do not like what you say, they ignore you and give you the silent treatment. I assure you that I sleep less these days, but not because of that. I have been called worse by better people over lesser offenses. I believe that a prerequisite of true and earned leadership is that one must have the conviction and will-power to stay true to their purpose and cause even in it when it is most difficult to do so. But, it also includes the ability to admit when one is wrong and change direction with the same passion as they stubbornly held to their former belief.

Lets now turn our attention to the merits of the main discussion? Is ASA and the content of the NACE ed programs on track and in touch?

Is NACE in touch with the will and direction of the rank and file? Are too many of the speakers hired to spread the propaganda of the various sponsoring vendors (of course, not Mike or others like Mike who are doing their best for all)? Of course all of the speakers mean well and most are really good people. However, maybe there is just not enough diversity of thought and dissent? It does not have to be evil intent that causes this. Perhaps those making the decision are just unaware that the days of conformity and compliance without dissent are quickly receding into the past.

One thing to keep in mind that everyone might not know. NACE is a commercial event. They sell sponsorship of various educational programs and presentations to the vendors and manufacturers. In doing so, the manufacturer is surely intent on having their message delivered to the industry. Can’t blame them, but the result is nearly all commercial messages laced into the educational presentation. It does not make the material less or more valuable, but many of the presenters are the paid speakers by those paint companies and other vendors. ARMS started it many years ago when they hired mostly shop guys to present Denny’s profit program. In more recent years, Dupont, PPG and others hired shop owners to spread their word and present their value-added programs. They felt they had greater credibility with the other shops, etc. It worked to a large degree and most if not all did a great job. Now, NACE has allowed sponsors of various presentations and they are naturally the companies speakers. The drawback is that if you disagree with the direction and pandering by the sponsoring company, you may have a bias about the speaker and the material and visa versa.

There are other problems with the system as it is, too. Many shops either run scared or tend to pander to insurers to gain favor and volume. That is natural, even if it is unseemly. When shops sit on advisory boards, their advise cannot help but be tainted or at least appear that way. Elected or appointed officers to various associations face a similar challenge. If they are too harsh to insurers as they represent their industry, they run the risk of having their business destroyed from reprisal. If they suck up, they may sell out the other shops, but they will get the work sent to them. With the potential for bias and conflict of interest, even the most pure advocate who should be totally above reproach is not! Ever position they take can and will be questioned. That is unless you are like my friend Lou who always states the negative position on a subject even when it is in his best interest and logical to support the positive. But that is another story or another time.

It is most likely that everyone is doing what they believe is best, but they are just unaware of the merits of other options. Many have not noticed that there is a growing swell of sentiment that would like to see NACE and the associations address their agenda items, instead of the pandering placating approach used over the last 10 years.

Should NACE reach out to other segments of the industry including the controversial segments so that they don’t become less and less relevant to the mass industry and eventually dry up and blow away? Perhaps?! There are more and more shops that have had enough and are not rolling over and playing the concession game started and continued by consolidators in the late 1990s and perpetuated in the early 2000’s. There are many new issues as well as new leaders looking for their 15 minutes of fame and to have their voice be heard. Perhaps the advisers and powers that be at ASA/NACE are just not aware of them … innocence assumed!

As for the over-indulgence of the insurance community, I believe there has been a tendency towards that in recent years. On one hand, you cannot have a dialog without all parties included in the conversation. Notice the term “dia” which is Latin for multiple parts versus “mono” meaning one as in monologuee. However, so much deference has been paid to insurers and their point of view that it has almost become ridiculous. There are a few that have made an art form of sucking up to the insurers. I like my friends that happen to work for insurance companies, but they are not royalty and without imperfection or error! There have certainly been a few people in key positions like at CIC that have pandered shamelessly to the insurers to the point that they are perceived as selling out the interests of the independent shop. As soon as the consolidator movement hit the industry in the late 1990’s, they took over the agenda and all that everyone talked about in most major industry meetings and conferences was how to play to insurers, etc. It was and still is the consolidator playbook and model for success. It is also disastrous for the independently owned shops that won’t be able to sell out.

I believe this is at least part of the the fuel for some peoples frustration and fire. The point everyone should consider carefully is that these issues are now literally business life or death and highly emotional. Shops are going out of business and dropping like flies in winter. The reason some are going out of business is not because they are not good businesses or that they don’t fix cars well, treat their customer well, etc. Many have gone by the wayside because they were not part of DRP and willing to roll over for concessions. With insurers able to steer work as they do, the decision to NOT go along to get along can be business suicide. However, many have begun to understand that going along with a bad business decision can also have disastrous consequences. When they find this out and have a dissenting opinion, many of the powers that be would rather keep them quiet and not make everyone uncomfortable.

Remember in the story of the “Emperor wore no cloths” anyone saying so would suffer untold consequences. The same is true now. There are many that have suffered. Consider how much a few suffered because they dared to raise the issue at CIC that insurers regularly and systematically write short sheets for consumer! As though everyone did not know that for the last 30 years! The people were sidestepped, pushed out of office and key positions, and ostracized by the CIC mafia.

I can attest to this personally. I have been ostracized by the powers that be at several organizations. I was called Elmer Gantry by one influential know-it-all that controls media sources and other industry entities. He has plans on being the next CIC chairman when Carstars term is up. Several years ago, I was told by three of the “god-fathers” of CIC that I was not welcome. I attended and spoke my mind regardless. I have been avoided omitted and targeted by various people in key positions with associations and other organizations. Most of those people are no longer holding office or are in the favor of the rank and file membership. I have gone toe to toe and nose to nose with a paint company executive that ignore propriety and became an association highest elected officer and pushed his hidden agenda regardless of the conflict of interest. He did all he could to put my business under, but we prospered instead. He has been bypassed for promotion in his company several times since and now seems to be just waiting for retirement. I could tell you far more horror stories, but you can certainly see my point already. It is not easy and it is a dangerous and fine line to take a position and stand your ground.

The tides have turned and the tipping point has been reached regardless of if and when some others notice. We have already seen the agenda, media coverage, watering hole conversations, and business strategies changing. It may take a few years for some to get the point, but the change is already underway. You will find out that the DRP will face major changes in the next few years. You will see shops aggressively pursue direct consumer marketing and many will diversify and not be obligated to insurance company’s rules. On the other hand, some Insurance companies have already begun to change their policies to make the selection of their DRP shop part of their contract with the consumer. There is even movement underway to offer auto insurance that is not traditional and does not follow the same repair rules at all. The question is when these other agendas and interesting stories will reach the industry and become the main topics of educational programs and formal key presentations and industry conferences.

Can NACE have presentations that appeal to shops that are just not willing to play by the DRP rules and would like to be INDEPENDENT and directly deal with the consumer? Could NACE actually benefit from having point-counterpoints, dissenting view points and even a renegade at the microphone for those that want to hear more of the other options to the conducting business in the “new world disorder?” How appealing is a presentation that tells shops how NOT to be a DRP shop? I don’t think it is Mike or other great speakers that have their heart in the right place that are the problem. I believe it is blindly supporting EVERY part of the drp model without checks and balances that have allowed this one-time customer service and marketing source program to become a cost control monster that is putting good shops out of business. Is there room for messages like that on the agenda and in list of programs offered at NACE?

I know my opinion. I remember the days when NACE was the most exciting and informative week of the entire year. What say all of you?

Thank you for your passion and convictions!