Does Telematics Go Far Enough in Reducing Fleet Risk?

The use of vehicle-based technology to monitor and assess driver behaviour is a growing trend but does an investment in telematics stack up in a road risk context?

Here are some of the reasons why we believe fleets should proceed with caution.  

Cost 

One of the quoted benefits of some telematics solutions is that fleets can reduce their claim risk – and ultimately their insurance premiums - by installing gadgets that monitor (and report on) driving techniques - BUT The technology doesn’t come cheap and if savings don’t materialize, the return on investment will be negative.  

Digital dependency 

If a red LED starts flashing on the dashboard to alert a driver to poor technique the chances are that he or she will drive more carefully. If the telematics aren’t there, the driver will revert back to their old ways. Bad drivers don’t need an alarm bell, they need to change their driving culture.

The only way to achieve sustained long-term improvement that will reduce accidents and risk is to establish the root cause of poor driving and tackle it head on. Flashing lights might act as a reminder to drive more smoothly but erratic drivers needs to understand why their behaviour is risky and how they can improve their awareness and skills.  

One size fits all 

As any fleet manager knows, all drivers are different. Telematics can be used to alert drivers to all sorts of poor behaviour on the roads but they adopt a blanket approach that covers a narrow range of issues.

Although the symptoms of bad driving may fall into the categories picked up by the technology, the causes will vary hugely from person to person. Driver training can be implemented throughout your fleet as a preventative measure but tailored training offers a one on one educational approach that gets to the heart of the problem, tackling  

Our Solution 

The cost of Telematics could be regarded as something of a “sledgehammer to crack a nut” (especially when used on drivers that don’t warrant the special attention) and should therefore only become the ‘weapon of choice’ in particular circumstances.

From a cost viewpoint, it makes more financial sense to tailor a risk program using a range of cost-effective tools to instill and maintain a better attitude towards driving safety.

Additionally, in contrast to a Telematics solution, a fleet would gain more value by introducing training tools that are specific to identified driving risks, which avoids the “blunderbuss” approach and reduces wasted time and resource.

At RVM we believe there is a place for Telematics in assisting the journey towards low risk and we also accept that both telematics and training can be costly. That’s why we do things differently.

Our range of risk assessment tools are designed to identify low, medium and high risk drivers quickly, accurately and cost-effectively and link electronically and concurrently with our tailored approach to training.

This approach is designed to target specific driver weaknesses and thereby ensure the risk reduction budget is used smartly by applying it only to those areas that will have the greatest benefit in reducing your driving risk. This may in some cases include telematics.  

Take the first step – identify your fleet’s weak spots. Call us on 0113 224 8888 to find out how or visit our website.

RVM Launches Carbon Neutral Fleet Scheme

Fleet management specialist RVM Fleet Services has launched a new initiative to help businesses reduce the environmental impact of their company vehicles.

The new carbon offset programme will measure the carbon footprint of a fleet and purchase verified carbon units to offset emissions.

The scheme will be a standard feature of the firm’s entire portfolio of accident and risk management services.

Managing Director of RVM, Diana Rose, said: “The new scheme will be an integral part of our service enabling RVM clients to run their fleets in a responsible carbon-friendly way without the need for additional investment.

“We recognise that running a fleet is very often our clients’ most polluting activity and as our continuing contribution and tangible commitment to the green debate, we are delighted to be able to offer this contribution. 

“Having pioneered other unique market initiatives, we are demonstrating once again that RVM is a customer-focused, innovative and environmentally responsible business that solves current-day issues for its clients.”

The scheme had been developed in conjunction with a carbon sourcing organisation that guarantees high quality, certified and traceable carbon credits from forestry products in the developing world. The credits will be certified by internationally recognised standards such as the ‘Verified Carbon Standard’ (VCS) and the ‘Climate, Community and Biodiversity’ (CCB) standard.

Find out how you can become a Carbon Neutral Fleet at - http://ow.ly/p18dJ

How Accurate Are Your Fleet’s Average Repair Costs?

Average repair costs should be a crucial metric for fleets, influencing key operational decisions as well as repair strategy.  It therefore seems incomprehensible that there is no industry standard for calculating this figure so that fleet managers can make true comparisons with confidence.

If just a few of the larger repairs are missing, the mathematical result can be grossly understated and in this way companies can be easily misled into believing that repair costs are better than they really are.  

So how can fleets verify the accuracy of their average repair costs?

Any assessment of repair costs should be for a finite period and must include all repairs incurred in that timeframe.  The figures used should be the full and actual cost incurred before any commissions or discounts. It should be noted that excessive commissions may in themselves result in raising the average as invoices may be inflated to cushion the impact on repairer profitability.

Not all claims should be included in average repair cost calculations. If there was no damage recorded or if damage was recorded but no repair work was carried out then it could be argued that in calculating average repair costs these cases should be excluded from ‘total number of cases’ when dividing it into ‘total repair costs’.

An accurate calculation must take into account all repairs performed for a particular fleet in a particular period, including smart and express repairs and additionally, any costs that don’t relate to repairs must be excluded.

These are just some of the issues surrounding the reasons why the current calculation of average repair cost is not relied upon more often.  If the figure were valid and reliable, fleet managers could make wiser decisions in the light of knowledge instead of casting around for the truth.

Better decisions about what kind of repairs, bought from where, via whom and on what terms would lead to lower repair costs and subsequently lower insurance premiums.

Lack of clarity in calculating average repair cost will continue to frustrate this procurement objective resulting in fleets acting on hunches and “gut feel”.  In this day and age with all the computing power at our fingertips, decisions should be able to flow from accurate and reliable data.

The fleet industry needs a standard method for calculating average repair costs. Until then RVM is offering companies a free assessment of their average repair costs to confirm accuracy and uncover errors or miscalculations.

How accurate are your average repair costs? For a FREE assessment click here to book an appointment or call 0113 2248888