Post - Manager states techs bother service advisors - waiting for work and follow ups.
Current WF example =
Here is why I like to do it this way.
Here is another thing I tried, that didnt work for X reasons….
Please help!
Good topic. We run a hybrid system — Shopmonkey + paper work orders — and it works well for us.
How we dispatch:
Each tech has a physical bin at the front. Service writers dispatch by placing a printed work order in the tech’s bin and assigning them the job in Shopmonkey. Some techs have notifications set up to text them when they’re assigned, so they know something’s in their slot without anyone saying a word. No one has to ask “what’s next?”
Documentation over conversation:
We try to keep verbal communication to a minimum — not zero, but minimal. Everything possible goes on the work order: tech notes, recommendations, whether a labor line is complete or not. The goal is that the work order tells the whole story. If someone’s out sick, on a test drive, or unavailable when a customer calls for an update — the advisor should be able to open that ticket and have everything they need without tracking the tech down.
The real question is what are they bothering SAs about:
I wouldn’t assume techs shouldn’t be talking to advisors — there’s plenty they should be communicating on. The question is what they’re coming to them with. Are they bringing problems? Or are they bringing problems with solutions? That’s a big difference. A tech walking up and saying “the subframe bolt is seized, what do I do?” is one thing. A tech walking up and saying “subframe bolt is seized — I think we need to quote X extra hours and here’s why” is completely different.
The stuff you want to cut out is the stuff that could’ve been a note in the system. The stuff you want to keep is the judgment calls that actually need a conversation. Figuring out which is which — and training your team on the difference — is where the real efficiency comes from.