IMI Magazine

Bodyshop management

Imagine if you could only use your mobile phone to contact friends who used the same network. Or there was no standard voltage for the UK, so if you moved home you faced the inconvenience and expense of buying new electrical appliances that were compatible. Or, moving further back, early train travellers had to hop from one train to another because different operators used different gauges of track until common sense prevailed with a standard gauge.

The analogies are useful because for years the bodyshop industry has grappled with the problem of insurers using different estimating systems that can only communicate with the same type.

Recognising that the industry was in danger of going down the same route, this time with management systems, six years ago Phil Starmer consulted with some of the key management system providers and developed a common automotive platform standard (CAPS).

Big Brother
Reactions from repairers when CAPS was first launched were apprehensive. It was viewed as a type of Big Brother, posing the risk of insurers being able to suck out sensitive information until Starmer assured them that the system did not link directly to any business application, but provided a secure gateway to allow different systems to connect.

Starmer describes it as a bit like a 'SCART' plug.  "Bodyshops control what information is passed to their work providers and bodyshop network partners," he says. "It's vital that the owner of any 'hub' is commercially neutral and independent . The owner must not be associated with an interested party that would also benefit from receiving the information from the bodyshops."

CAPS' credibility gained ground when Aviva, the UK's largest motor insurer, adopted it to facilitate a two way online connection to its bodyshop network. CAPS creates an interface between the Aviva IVM reporting system and the bodyshop management systems. Work instructions from Aviva now appear automatically inside the management systems used by the repair shops, with the insurer saying it avoids errors and speeds up the whole process.

At the same time, status updates and other information is passed backwards and forwards between the two parties, avoiding duplication of administration and sparing repairers the effort of manually updating status reports of work in progress on websites.

The CAPS server also enables other authorised B2B applications to plug in, such as ECP (estimating conversion portal) and Claimwatch (online vehicle tracking system).

Keeping customers informed
Paul Harper of Harborne Accident Repair Centre has been using CAPS for about three months to link his management system to Claimwatch. "It's reduced a lot of administration and keeps customers informed of what stage their vehicle is in repair," he says. "Customers and work providers can go online to look at their vehicle and customers can also get automated text messages from us to keep them informed throughout the repair process from date of authorisation to completion."

So far, so good. But CAPS is not the only 'connector', and while it may seem that a bit of healthy competition is to be welcomed, it's ironic that the issue of 'commonality' is causing division.

Main rival is PineTree Consulting, developer of the Advance bodyshop management system (now owned by PPG Industries), which has introduced ActiveWeb.

Pinetree took part in discussions which led to the CAPS consortium (currently comprising  suppliers like Emacs, Concorde Informatics and Autoflow) before deciding to go its own way.

Flexible interface
"ActiveWeb is an alternative open standard that was designed to link to a wide variety of systems and already has links to all of the stakeholders, such as bodyshops, insurance companies, fleet companies, claims handlers, group owners, recovery and rental companies," says Lee Sumner, general manager of PineTree Consulting. "It has a very flexible interface which is being put to more and more innovative uses each day, such as linking to telephone systems and accounting packages, things we didn't foresee when we started the development. We won't send any information unless we have written authorisation from both parties about what information has been agreed between them."

Sumner says that ActiveWeb and CAPS are two very different things and describes CAPS as simply a transport mechanism for data from bodyshop management systems. "I don't see a potential for linking CAPS into ActiveWeb other than as a data feed," he commented.

But John Driscoll, managing director of system supplier BMS, also part of the CAPS consortium, disagrees and believes that the real advantage of CAPS is its openness and ability to offer competitive choice. "While there shouldn't just be one system, there should be commonality," said Driscoll. "You can have an underground transport system with the Bakerloo line, the Northern line and the District line, but you've got to make sure there are links to allow you to get to all of the stations.

Unite, not divide!

"The two biggest deliverers of digital television are Sky and Virgin and in the early days if you had a Sky box but changed to Virgin then you wouldn't be able to view your Sky channels," he continued. "There was this big row, but in the end the two companies realised that segregation wasn't the way forward and came to an agreement. Why are ActiveWeb dividing the market when what our customers want is unification?"

Contrast the situation in the UK with the US where the need for standardised communications protocols was recognised 15 years ago. The outcome was the Collision Industry Electronic Commerce Association (CIECA), with a committee comprising representatives from insurers, repairers, suppliers, rental car companies and, of course, all software suppliers.

A similar effort in the UK was brokered a number of years ago by the ABP Club, but resisted by insurers who wanted to retain their own monolithic systems.

It's probable that there won't be one clear winner in the common standard stakes, especially as there are many additional standards being used. What is clear is that had the industry made some key decisions around 10 years ago, the body repair sector would now be enjoying the type of benefits achieved by CIECA.

Heather Grant