Ed Rammel is the vice president of marketing for Dayco Products LLC. In this capacity, he is responsible for all marketing activities for the automotive aftermarket including, product management, sales administration, purchasing, product research and development, cataloging, communications, sales automation and intellectual properties.

Rammel began his career in 1975 with the Dayton Tire and Rubber Co. He joined Dayco in 1985, and has held a variety of positions in both finance and marketing during his tenure with the company. Rammel has served on several AWDA committees including Marketing and Communications and the University of the Aftermarket Marketing committees. He is currently a member of the AAIA Category Management committee. In addition, Rammel has participated in several AAIA seminars and webinars promoting the advantages of the adoption of aftermarket data standards.

Rammel holds a BSBA from The Ohio State University, an MBA from the University of Dayton and a DBA from California Coast University. He was awarded the Master Automotive Aftermarket Professional (MAAP) designation from Northwood’s University of the Aftermarket in October, 2001.
 
In today’s Executive Interview, Rammel speaks about technology in the aftermarket, data standards and association initiatives like OptiCat and the SEMA Data Pool.

In addition, Dayco today announced the acquisition of WVR Rolamentos LTDA, a manufacturer of automotive tensioners and pulleys, located in Sao Paulo, Brazil. To read more about the acquisition, click here.

You have been active in the industry as an advocate for better adoption of technology and adherence to and use of industry data standards. How did you get involved initially?

I first became aware of the role that data plays in our marketplace through my involvement on AAIA’s category management committee. There, and in our business here at Dayco, we struggled with the problems that result when incongruous and disparate data sets are fed into different software applications and the less than satisfactory results that occur with the output. It quickly became obvious that something very elemental had to be done with the data itself in order to use the technology.

I assume that led you to the Industry Data Standards?

Clearly. This industry is blessed to have such a robust set of standards. At Dayco, we sell into some other industry segments where standards are not nearly so rich. With ACES and PIES, the aftermarket has the tools it needs to get its data in a “sharable state.” The problem in the past has been there was simply too little adoption; but now the problem is sloppy adoption.

What do you mean by that?

Most companies these days like to puff out their chests and say that they have adopted the standardized formats of ACES and PIES. But the reality is few really have. Too often what happens is that one department, usually IT or cataloging, gets the “assignment” to get the data into compliant formats, and without the resources or cooperation of all parties the result is a set of data that is “PIES-like” or “nearly-ACES.”

Why do you think that is?

I think there are three contributing factors.

First is a lack of understanding and appreciation by most top-level management for the important role that data plays and the complexity involved in getting it right. Most of us in upper management at aftermarket companies did not come up in the computer age. While most of us had a PC foisted upon us, we really only used computers as typewriters or as calculators. We don’t really understand the issues of data in different operating environments in the same way that those who have always used computers do.

That lack of understanding leads to the second point: a shortage of resources necessary to transform data. The process of getting your data into compliant formats takes the commitment of top management because literally every department in a company interacts with data. Without the total resolve of the entire organization, it can’t get done right. As I said before, if the task is delegated to just one department, the task never gets done right and the resulting data file will never please a channel partner that receives it.

The third element is tied up in the first two: the inability for top executives to see a return on investment in the effort. Most executives who are intimidated by technology sponsor only half-hearted efforts at undertaking data adoption. Consequently, their organization suffers constant complaints from channel partners about the quality of their data. They just dig in their heels at any suggestion that more resources need to be committed to data clean-up.

The reality is, to survive going forward, companies are going to have to have good data. Postponing getting it done puts one at a distinct and increasing disadvantage.

How can the aftermarket drive better adoption?

I think it will only happen with one or more of the industry data pool initiatives getting traction. In theory, the creation of ACES and PIES should have been enough to address the industry’s data needs. If every manufacturer complied with the ACES and PIES formats 100 percent and every reseller wanted only 100 percent compliant data, our industry data issues would be resolved. But that is not the case.

As I said earlier, far too many manufacturers have “PIES-like” or “nearly-ACES” files. Add to that [the fact] that virtually every data receiver requires some deviation from the standards in the data format they require from their suppliers. Where that sort of a data environment exists, the only viable solution I see is to put an industry-owned and operated entity in the middle that can screen suppliers data for accuracy, standards compliance and completeness and can then send that data to each receiver with the different variations each requires.

Are you speaking about any one industry initiative in particular?

Actually two. AASA has bought into OptiCat, and SEMA is working on an industry-wide data pool. Those two initiatives represent legitimate efforts on the part of the industry to get our arms around the data issue. Understandably, every business thinks the way they are managing their data is the way everyone should. But the reality is, none of us is more important than any one of us.

What I would like to see is for AASA and SEMA to get tougher and give our industry what it so desperately needs: a single place for manufacturers to screen and put their data in AAIA standard formats and a single place for receivers to get their data, transformed into the format they desire.

Why are you so passionate about these efforts?

This is an industry that is drowning in inventory, levels of which are rising every day and will for years to come. Businesses that don’t take action to cope with this reality will be consumed by it. When I look at what tools are available to avoid drowning, technology is really the only viable answer. Solutions like collaborative forecasting and replenishment tools, IPO enabled special orders, “see you, see me” inventory visibility and others are being successfully used today in a number of industries that have solved their data issues. In other words, the critical technology we need is readily available. That technology will only work if it’s supported by good clean data. All of the pieces of the puzzle are in front of us; what I’m passionate about is putting it together.