2022-10-13 OEM Repair Procedures and Guild Sheet Data Meeting Minutes

Public Page

Date

Oct 13, 2022

Agenda

• Antitrust

• Meeting minute review

• Welcome/Networking

• Review Project Plan

• Set Priority

• Work on Workflows

Meeting Minutes

• Antitrust Accepted

• Meeting minutes reviewed and accepted

• Review of Project Plan

  • We need a thesaurus of all known aliases of a part

    • Each OEM may call part by a different name, and we need a way to cross reference.

    • Hollander has a catalog where you pick by picture

    • Interchange number can be used to identify a part

    • Hollander exchange system is only good as the OEMS willing to share information with them, if the OEMs don’t share the data, it is not as beneficial.

    • Hollander is used more for salvage and it is possible that new cars are not in the Hollander system.

  • What what I would suggest is we have a we have a standardization which is the estimating systems, right? So generally in in TCP is a little bit different, but generally they're standardizing the quarter. Panel is always described as the Left quarter panel or right quarter panel, a Fender left left Fender away sender and it's not perfect, but that already exists in in our estimating system. So when we're talking about transmitting messages in my mind, we wouldn't have to go from estimating system and translate it into Hollander.

    Then Hollander and translated into OEM service information and we can kind of cut that process out and just go.

    Estimating system part name which already exists and is already being written to.

    Prepare procedure.

  • Yeah. And I guess the other thought there is in the estimating system, you still have the same, basically the same diagrams. And when you write the estimate, it does give you a choice of part numbers, right? You can print the part numbers at the end of the estimate. So from that you should be able to, he says, with tongue and cheek be able to go.

    And and do do that query so it it was just a thought and I wanted to bring it back up about the Hollander thing again. It was not an endorsement or a denial. It was just a thought starter.

  • Items from last meeting

    • SAE Standards

    • AAA Standards

    • CIECA Line Item Categories

      • If CIECA members are using these descriptions, why reinvent the wheel.

  • AllData Advantage and or Mitchell Cloud estimating must be doing some kind of cross reference.

  • The Procedures being linked to the parts so we can easily access

  • Service information and EPC’s are different systems.

  • So if if I were to pull it back, I mean to the original presentation, which is figuring out what kind of shipping container was going to use.

    In my and I know we had talked about not making the estimating system to center the universe, but I think the fact is that they are.

    You know, the estimating system is kind of our container support, MSO, BMS if you will maybe to be a little bit more specific. So we need a way I think with the shops are saying is we need a way to quickly be able to figure to find a repair procedure. And Gene had spoke to the Phil a little bit earlier, right. So we need so the shop needs to be able to send a message to an OEM or a licensee of I need this repair information. There's an easy way to send that which is via EMS or BMS by simply doing an export.

    They're sending that information already by saying I'm repairing a quarter panel or replacing the quarter panel or repairing a friendly. All right, it's not perfect, but that's one way we're already sending a message about here's the information I need, and that information is standardized and the part names are standardized by the estimating systems already, which kind of makes it a little bit simpler from there. That information gets transmitted to let's see some or all data or CCC of via their repair methods. And they again, they've already done that work to kind of link up.

    The part names to the repair procedures and so I think it if we talk about we need a a repair to send a message to a methods provider.

    That can be done through EMS or BMS, and then we need to send that information. I think at the end back into the estimating system, we were talking about to say that, yes, we've read it or we have done that research well, that's great because of the estimating system used. EMS and BMS already. So that would be, I would think that easy vector to send that information back into PC or.

    Auto text or Mitchell?

    So when I think about how we're going to get all this information, how the shots going to send the request, how that request is going to be filled, and then how that information is going to be sent back into the estimating system, I think I think we're talking about EMS or BMS and then we talked about really just mapping out.

    Names in the EMS are BMS to the OEM component and so maybe they they have replaced rail and we get back to Mark was saying three different versions of of the rail for partial and full and something else. But I think that's good enough for what Gene was saying, which is the estimator at that point knows what knows what he wants and can pick it out. And then maybe there's some method of transmitting back in the estimating.

  • The different workflows to pull the data

  • repairer perspective: if Mitchell and CC and all data and all these companies already have methods of getting this information to us, whether it's through EMS or through standalone software, what this really is it seems redundant to me to have to create another method of piping this data into the estimating program.

  • Mitchell's CC all data and OEC with collision and advanced repair logic all have logic and we need to get the standards built with help from each of these companies to Align the estimate or the repair plan with the procedures straight from the OE.

Great Meeting Everyone

Up Next

• Antitrust

• Meeting minute Review

• Welcome/Networking

• Pick up here on this conversation and continue to share.

Action items

Decisions

Participants

• @Paulette Reed

• Andrew Batenhorst

• Paul Barry

• Shaughn Kennedy

• Ross Whiteley

• Paul Marshall

• Trent Tinsley

• Dave Butler

• Dale Ringwald

• Michael Giarrizzo

• Bruce Davidson

• Frant Terlep

• Gene Lopez

• Stacey Phillips

• Aaron Rolfsrud

• Erin Solis

• Nick Dominato

• Todd Korpi

• Ginny Whelan

• Tim Ronak

• Kelci Lemanski

• Eric Schultz

Participants in the meetings are noted for your information.  If you have questions on the committee’s activities, please contact a recent attendee. https://cieca.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/CPSC/pages/1354760193