![\"The indices (shown in the diagram below) are multivariable components measured by several questions that are weighted within the model. The questions assess customer evaluations of the determinants of each index. Indices are reported on a 0 to 100 scale. The survey and modeling methodology quantifies the strength of the effect of the index on the left to the one to which the arrow points on the right. These arrows represent \"impacts.\" The ACSI model is self-weighting to maximize the explanation of customer satisfaction (ACSI) on customer loyalty. Looking at the indices and impacts, users can determine which drivers of satisfaction, if improved, would have the most effect on customer loyalty.\"](https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/model.jpg "\\"The indices (shown in the diagram below) are multivariable components measured by several questions that are weighted within the model. The questions assess customer evaluations of the determinants of each index. Indices are reported on a 0 to 100 scale. The survey and modeling methodology quantifies the strength of the effect of the index on the left to the one to which the arrow points on the right. These arrows represent \\"impacts.\\" The ACSI model is self-weighting to maximize the explanation of customer satisfaction (ACSI) on customer loyalty. Looking at the indices and impacts, users can determine which drivers of satisfaction, if improved, would have the most effect on customer loyalty.\\"")
What be the ACSI, you ask? The American Consumer Satisfaction Index, conducted by the University of Michigan's Ross School of Business. As for methodology, the explanation is well above my pay grade. (I'd just ask "How satisfied are you with your car?" and call it good.) Unhelpfully enough, the automotive sector's results are listed alphabetically. But the bottom line is as above. And the answering spin, reported by The Detroit News, is mucho predictable. "We still say with a high level of confidence that the level of our customer satisfaction is improving for most of our brands, based on independent studies and internal data," GM spokeswoman Janine Fruehan said. "We have a renewed and intensified focus on satisfying our Chrysler, Jeep and Dodge customers that has been under way for about a year," Chrysler spokesman Ed Saenz said. "The new management is committed to satisfying our customers at every level. We are beginning to see, in internal numbers, improvements that indicate we are on the right path." And "This survey runs counter to the results of other recent surveys, in which we've made great progress," Ford spokesman Mark Schirmer said. Never mind, then. I guess.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
“Denial” is not just a river in Egypt……….
To be fair, Buick did score highly and their reliability has tied with Lexus.
But the bit which is mentioned less often is that Buick makes and sells a fraction of the cars Lexus sells per month (Last month Buick sold 9631 cars compared to Lexus’ figures of 20253). So Buick can focus more of its dwindling resources to manufacture and selling. But Lexus still achieve top placing despite making more cars. So it kind of puts Buick’s achievement into context.
The sad thing with Buick is that if they sold the Buick Enclave in the UK, I’d seriously consider buying one. I think it’s a good looking car.
I’d also reckon that the average purchase price of a Buick is likely half that of a Lexus brand. Buick’s major customers are also elderly and probably the last bastion of the die hard domestic car buyers. Buick’s sales should also be growing with the number of baby boomers reaching geriatric but they’ve been constantly losing sales.
“Progress” and “right path” mean “We’re going to ignore the fact that we’re still near the bottom, and focus on the fact that we’re better than we used to be.”
Actually looking at the article, I see why I generally ignore satisfaction studies, and have avoided conducting one myself.
From what I’ve heard, ACSI does about as good a job methodologically as you can do. But what the latest study appears to have found, nevertheless, is that people are dissatisfied with their SUV because of its poor fuel economy.
In other words, they’re unhappy with their vehicle not because of anything Detroit did, but because they, as car buyers, chose a vehicle type ill-suited for $4 gas.
Another problem with these results: they’re only at the brand level. They would be more meaningful if they were at the model level. That way we could see how, say, a Chevrolet Malibu stacks up against a Honda Accord. As it is, all we know is that Chevrolet scored very low, likely because their sales mix in the past three years was heavy on SUVs and large pickups.
Buick’s sales should also be growing with the number of baby boomers reaching geriatric but they’ve been constantly losing sales.
It doesn’t work that way. Buick buyers didn’t just start buying Buicks once they got old. They’re merely sticking with the brand they came to know when they were younger. For today’s youth Toyota is Buick Lite. It’s their parents’ car, not theirs.
Buick’s sales should also be growing with the number of baby boomers reaching geriatric but they’ve been constantly losing sales.
Buick belonged to my parent’s generation. It was the car just below caddy. Now both buick and caddy are losing their customers due to the market literally dying off. And caddy is dropping many models. Will they end up as the performance division of Chevrolet? Seems like that is where they are headed with the CVS models. Sad that detroit seems completely lost as to what to do to turn things around.
Nice Headline, but the Truth is:
Toyota Lexus Lincoln BMW Buick Cadillac are at the top and Chrysler Kia Mazda and Jeep are at the bottom
I did see the chart on the scores on another site. And it had GM with 4 brands in the top 5. Caddy and Buick only dropped 1 point, while Saturn gained 4 and GMC gained 1. So the imports may have gotten ahead this time, atleast GM is at the bottom although the same cant be said for Chrysler.
But I will say that the title here is misleading, since the only domestic really at bottom is Chryler while GM and Ford are far from bottom.
I agree with Strippo and Rday, Buick lost potential boomer customers back in the mid 80s to early 90s when Lexus, Infiniti, and Acura were getting started in the US. In fact, it was because of the boomers that the Japanese luxury/sport market did so well here. So that was when Buick was mentally written off by the then 30 and 40 something boomers.
GM is incapable of thinking beyond the next quarterly P/E statement, so why would we expect them to think long term, as in years or decades? Their ADD instant gratification mentality is their undoing.
To be fair, Buick did score highly and their reliability has tied with Lexus.
That’s true, but you have to dig a little deeper to get to the circumstances around that note: the bulk of that score is on the back of the Regal and Century, which make up the bulk of Buick’s sales and are, for intents and purposes, the same car. At the time that statistic came out, the Lacrosse/Allure were brand new, but I’d hazard is applies to them as well.
The Regal/Century/Lacrosse are not-particularly-advanced, not-particularly-well-performing cars, but the engineering has been thoroughly worked out and the plant they’re made at (Oshawa, Ontario) is probably GM’s best. They’re also sold to GM’s least fickle customers.
The other Buicks (Ranier, Rendezvous, Park Avenue/Le Sabre) sold a fraction of the Regal/Century’s volume, and weren’t at all that reliable.
Lexus makes a full line, of which the RX and ES are the bulk sellers, but nowhere the percentage of total Lexus sales that the W-Body Buicks are. And the Lexuses are, by and large, much more complex cars sold to wealthy, fickle customers. That Lexus can keep customers happy given those two factors is the salient point.
If Cadillac were as reliable as Lexus, that would be news worth crowing about.
I wonder how many of these spin-meisters actually drives a domestic product. I’m willing to bet, depending on their salaries, there is something Germanic sitting in the parking garage adjacent to their office.
Mr. Karesh is correct. From the article –
The results contrast with recent gains by General Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co. in other quality and consumer satisfaction studies. Fornell attributed the drop to rising fuel prices, which he said have soured consumers to the big trucks and sport utility vehicles that have until recently been the focus of U.S. automakers.
The study focuses on people who’ve bought their vehicle anywhere from 6 months ago to 3 years ago. People are upset that vehicles they bought w/o a thought for fuel economy don’t get great fuel economy. Not very worthwhile information for comparing vehicles.
I’d also note that Lexus finishes at the top, and it’s not exactly a brand bought primarily for it’s fuel economy.
As an aside –
Buick’s (and Caddy’s) customers aren’t dying off, they’re going to Lexus.
In my family’s fleet, there is one Caddy and 4 germanic thingies. OTH, my mother drives a 2 year old Buick LaCrosse with 4k miles on it. I occasionally give it an Italian tune up. It is a very good car that could easily be better – sport suspension is what? – a little rejiggering of geometry, a few curvy 20-30mm pipe sections front and back… And they have some of the best auto seats there are in Saabs – at least they used to. Perhaps the Saab guys could tell them that sitting on the floor doesn’t make a car sporty.
“Buick belonged to my parent’s generation. It was the car just below caddy. Now both buick and caddy are losing their customers due to the market literally dying off. And caddy is dropping many models. Will they end up as the performance division of Chevrolet? Seems like that is where they are headed with the CVS models. Sad that detroit seems completely lost as to what to do to turn things around.”
Please explain what a CVS model is. The Caddy you can pick up at the corner drug store?
“…the study shows that as we plan for the future we have rich opportunities to improve customer satisfaction and loyalty. We see this as a key component to our growth strategy…”
Blah, blah, blah…translation:
“…well, we can only go up from here! If we can somehow figure out how to start making good products that people want to buy at a price they want to pay, then we can stay in business…”
And here I was thinking that since I reached this conclusion in 1965 it would no longer be news.
Dealer srevice is a big part of customer satisfaction and here the Big 3 fail miserably. Everyone I know has had a negative experience with Big 3 dealers. To point the rear spring broke in my Grand Prix which caused a blowout which destroyed my fender liner. I ordered a new liner and got it 3 months later after several calls to my GM dealer. Now that’s service? Detroit still doesn’t understand that one person with a bad experience tells 18 others while those with a good experience only tell 3. Better to limit the bad news.
Re: Potemkin’s comments. For me, a bad customer service experience is usually the last straw. My Fords were not good cars, but it was my experience with Ford Credit that swore me off them for good. The local Honda dealer’s service is bad, too, but I have only been there once in eight years. That’s not enough of an irritant to be important.
Why should I trust this self-serving study any more than I trust any other self-serving study?
quasimondo: “Why should I trust this self-serving study any more than I trust any other self-serving study?”
I’ll bet a whole lot of Detroit suits are asking that same question. Especially Maximum Bob.
Carry on! Business as usual!
On the other hand… This “self-serving study” is well aligned with other key measures of Detroit’s success:
– Declining market share.
– Low transaction prices.
– Bad resale values.
– Tanking profits give way to frightening losses.
– CR, for years, has rated Detroit cars below Toyota and Honda.
So, is this – and any other – “self-serving study” a worthless anomaly or is it part of the pattern? At what point do the fanboys – and Detroit suits – give up on decrying “the perception gap” and admit that they have a real problem? And do something about it?
“We are beginning to see, in internal numbers, improvements that indicate we are on the right path.”
Ah, yes, well, when your a private company the internal numbers are the only one that matters. And, coincidently, the only ones you can make up.
I would say Buick did better because of brand loyalty. How many of their owners have owned anything else in 20 years? Seriously?
My mother had to have her arm twisted to try “one of those little japanese cars.” It was 1990. I was paying the down payment though, so off to the Nissan lot we went (My uncle was working for Nissan, and her sister liked the cars so that helped). She would not even drive the Stanza (too small). She got in the Maxima and then had to have it. We bought it, she still has it. Years ago, GM got her to go to a customer research study where they put her in different cars and got her opinion. She hated them all, and told them that none of them were as good as her Maxima which was pretty old by then.
So, based on that anecdote, and the folks I see driving Buicks, I am betting they are happy because they don’t know what they are missing.
And the Lexuses are, by and large, much more complex cars sold to wealthy, fickle customers. That Lexus can keep customers happy given those two factors is the salient point.….
Wealthier, yes. But let’s be real. Most of the people who buy cars like this do so because of a sense of status. Lexus earned their reputation, but if the actual quality faltered it would years before these buyers would make a fuss. See MB for a classic example of this. They might bitch and moan when they go to the dealer again and again, but they will boast proudly about what they drive. Do you really think they put together that their car with the three pointed star goes to the service bay with greater frequency than almost any domestic product?
And there lies the problem with all surveys of this type. The people who collect and provide the data – you and me – have emotional ties to the product and come with loads of preconceived notions. Probably the only way to get unbiased data would be to take the warranty claim information from the dealer network without their knowledge. Since that isn’t going to happen, these surveys will never past the test of true science rigor.
golden2husky: “See MB for a classic example of this. They might bitch and moan when they go to the dealer again and again, but they will boast proudly about what they drive. Do you really think they put together that their car with the three pointed star goes to the service bay with greater frequency than almost any domestic product?”
CR is able to identify a significant gulf between Lexus and M-B, so there’s some measure of rationality in consumer responses. I can’t see why a Lexus owner would have a reason to overlook defects in his $50K car where an M-B owner wouldn’t.
Foreign car owners don’t bitch about their machines because they would just get told “why didn’t you buy American”. The problem with brand loyalty is that it restricts your car experience so you don’t find out that something is much better than what you’ve been buying for years. Brand loyalty is what GM relied on for years. In the 80’s they said 85% of Chevy customers were return customers, now it looks like 85% never return.