The IMI announce ATA, a new qualification for the Motor Industry
Sarah Sillars, Chief Executive of The Institute of the Motor Industry (IMI) has annonced a new management qualification called ”Automotive Technician Accreditation” (ATA), which will be launched in the Spring of 2009.
In a article published by Automotive Management, Sarah Sillars, IMI Chief Executive, is quoted as saying,
“Instead of training which says one qualification fits all, we’re going to try and apply a consistent standard – one where there are many different ways to reach that level.
Most businesses want four things – operational management, financial management, staff that are skilled at handling people issues and customer relationship issues.”
Questions for discussion:
What do you think about Motor Industry Qualifications in general?
Is the IMI on the right track with this new qualification?
Your thoughts are most welcome on this topic as it may shape the future of our industry.
© Copyright Insight Training & Development Ltd 2008
You have our permission to provide a link to this page, but you are not allowed to copy it.
ATA is a great and long overdue initiative to raise standards and improve the professionalism and reputation of the industry. So far it has been rolled out to Technicians, and as a result more repairs should be ‘right first time’.
If we are to change customer perception, we need to improve the all important interface between customers and front line staff. ATA for Service Advisors has now been piloted, and should be launched soon. Versions for Parts Advisors and Sales Executives will be developed soon.
The quality of interaction between front-line staff and their customers is however dependant on the relationship they have with their managers and the culture of the dealership. This in turn is affected by the relationship with the manufacturer through the franchise agreement. Often the focus on short-term targets can work against long-term relationships, and can adversley affect the way staff handle customers.
I believe that the real and sustainable benefits will only come through improving the professionalism of dealer management - so I look forward to the launch of Automotive Management Accreditation.
Roger, you appear to be “in the know” about this subject because you make interesting comments about ATA, but I have some questions for you please:
1) Why is ATA long overdue? Is it because The IMI are slow in development or is it that there is something unique about this qualification?
2) Do you see this as an “IMI” qualification or a “Motor Industry” qualification?
3) It seems to be aimed at Technicians and advisors as opposed to management, is this correct?
4) Sarah Sillars says that “there are several routes to gaining the qualification, not just training”. How will the information transfer take place if it’s not done by training?
Lots to be answered here, perhaps you can answer them with different comments rather than 1 big one?
Many thanks,
SL
Stuart - you are right, I have worked closely with IMI. To answer your points:
1) The industry has had a poor reputation for a long time, and was facing a super complaint from consumer association. The consequences of this would have been legislation and possible licensing (as required for MOT Testers). IMI’s ATA initiative staved this off, and self-regulation is preferable to more Government red tape. Customers will be able to insist on ATA qualified technicians, and thereby ‘cut out the cowboys’ in the trade.
2) Since the IMI is now the Sector Sills Council, it can represent the industry needs directly to Government. Consultation will improve and new qualifications should be closer to what the industry really needs.
3) ATA started with Technicians, but the same principals are being applied to Customer Service, Sales, Parts and, most importantly, Management. Too often people have been promoted into management positions with no preparation or training. Only 14% of managers hold any relevant qualifications. Automotive Management Accreditation will provide a simple assessment route to ensure that managers operate to required standards and a code of conduct.
4) ATA is an assessment to a standard. It doesn’t matter how or where an individual learns the techniques or aquires the knowledge, as long as he/she can demonstrate competence in applying them effectively.
Hope that answers your questions?
Roger, many thanks, I have more questions please.
1) What is the method of assessment for ATA?
2) What’s to stop a “cowboy” gaining ATA status and then slipping back to previous standards?
3) The IMI does not speak for the whole Industry, nor does the Industry comply with all that The IMI suggests. Therefore why do you think that ATA will be accepted any differently to ARMS? (Which I think failed btw).
Hi, Stuart
1) Assessment for ATA is conducted at licenced centres who have been approved by IMI Verifiers. All Assessors are vetted to ensure that they have up-to-date competence and occupational experience. Candidates have to carry out a series of tasks and complete questionnaires, etc. I am not too familiar with the detail, as I am only concerned with non-technical disciplines - contact IMI and/or visit the ATA website for information.
Service Advisors complete 3 scenarios with Actors playing the part of customers. They also complete an in-tray exercise and questionnaires, etc.
2) All candidates have to prove their competence by passing the assessed activities and signing up to the code of conduct. To retain their ATA status they have to be re-assessed every 5 years (this may well be reduced to 3 years). Presumably the accreditation can be revoked if the individual breeches the code of conduct or does not maintain the required standards - though Im not too sure how this will be ‘policed’.
3) All the major manufacturers have taken up ATA and already over 8,000 technicians have been accedited. The ATA website will enable customers to locate their nearest ATA accredited technician.
ARMS was too high a level of qualification for the vast majority of dealer managers, and the prescribed assessment method was too academic. The standards are ok, but the qualification based on it was ill-conceived in my view. Could you see the average Sales Manager writing 10 x 3000 word assignments? High registration cost was also a factor. Although more flexibility in assessment methodology was agreed, the take up of this qualification has been very poor and only around 50 candidates have completed so far. IMI have therfore developed a simpler qualification and will be developing other levels in due course.
RD
Roger, thank you for the info, points 2 and 3 are very interesting.
However, your comments on ARMS are also interesting, you say, “The standards are ok, but the qualification based on it was ill-conceived in my view. Could you see the average Sales Manager writing 10 x 3000 word assignments?”
Are you suggesting the average Sales Manager is not capable of such a task and the new qualification (AMA) will be “Simplified” to a level that an “average Sales Manager” can accomplish?
If this new qualification is “lowering the bar” to meet a level of competence that will generate a qualification rather than educating the people to a higher level of competance, what value will this new qualifcation have? Sorry I just don’t get it.
SL
Roger, given what you say I assume that you work for/with the IMI, but I’m afraid that you cannot say ATA staved off the NCC Super Complaint.
The NCC withdrew their super complaint because of the progress make by the RMIF and SMMT (under the guidance of the then DTI Retail Motor Strategy Group) towards developing an industry consumer code under the OFT Consumer Codes Approval Scheme. In November last year the NCC agreed the text of a code of practice for the car servicing and repair sector with the RMSG. It is this code of practice that has caused the complaint to be withdrawn.
I’m astonished that you think managers in the sector are incapable of getting an ARMS Cert or Dip. Are we so useless that we can’t cope with what you describe as an ‘academic’ approach? Is the solution to provide a dumbed-down piece of paper that you can get by turning uo to a assessment centre for a couple of hours and promising to stick to a good behaviour code? What’s the point of that?
The reason why 8,000 technicians have got an ATA card is because it’s so easy to get. With technology developing at the speed it does how can you test ‘up-to-date’ competence once every five years? There are apprentices reaching the end of their apprenticeship that need additional updating/training to remain competent for this very reason - and this after just two years.
Achieving AMA status will make no difference to the proportion of managers with relevant qualifications you mention beacuse AMA won’t be recognised as a qualification by the QCA, will it?
I won’t be bothering with it, that’s for sure.
FF.
I wasn’t suggesting for a moment that sales managers are not capable, but that they are unlikely to commit the time and effort to completing such assignments. Most of the managers that were signed up for ARMS have not continued with it for various reasons. A lot of the early assignments submitted didn’t meet the required standard. As far as I know, only around 50 have persisted and been accredited - most of those from Scotland.
ARMS (QCA level 5) really requires a manager to have full budgetary and business planning responsibility, also one of the units is marketing - in many dealer groups managers are not given that degree of autonomy - I don’t agree with that practice, but it is a fact.
IMI’s new Certificate in Automotive Management has a narrower focus with 3 modules covering generic management skills and a choice of 2 from 17 specialist modules that focuus on job roles or disciplines. The assessments can be designed to address real business issues and hence improve performance. It is a much more practical approach, based on what industry consultation indicated was required, and is pitched more appropriately for departmental managers. If you look at the content, I don’t think you will consider that the bar has been lowered too much.
I agree that Technicians skills need to keep pace with technology - they should be re-assessed more frequently, but I understand that they do have to commit to regular CPD.
I accept that other organisations have had a hand in staving off the super complaint. There is a need for a more coordinated approach within the industry rather than many different organisations pursuing their own agendas.
RJD
Roger
I feel totally gutted and extremely let down by the IMI for now introducing this “weak” AMA qualification,
Let me explain,
I am currently enrolled on the ARMS programme, and have spent many many hours of research and writing assignments to a standard which I thought I was not capable of achieving, this was all done in my “own time” and I still had to perform a full-time management position on a daily basis.
Now I’m told the bar is being lowered because other managers were not prepared to put in the effort required unlike myself!
***Where is the motivation for people like me?????
The only consolation I will take out of this is that I know myself I have improved my own management skills, however with such a small take up I guess the industry will never even recognise or understand what I’ve endured to achieve this.
A very disappointed
KV.
Just to clarify an earlier point - ATA was a major factor to the original deferral of the supercomplaint, but you are right that the RMSG ( BERR’s Retail Motor Strategy Group) all agreeing to the code was what actually shelved it. The RMSG made this commitment personally to the trade minister and the next day the supercomplaint was relaxed.
Kevin - ARMS will still have recognition as a level 5 (degree level) vocational qualification. AMA when it comes along will in no way match that or belittle your achievements. Because of it’s narrow focus, IMI’s Certificate in Automotive Management is only accredited at level 3. You should feel very proud that you are one of an elite group that has achieved a Nationally recognised level 5 qualification.
Congratulations
Roger
I’m sorry Roger, ATA was but a grain of sand on the world’s beaches when it came to the super complaint. If there had been no Code, the complaint would have stood. Period. In fact, the Motor Industry Service and Repair Code of Practice was launched to the industry at a press briefing held at the OFT on 23rd May jointly delivered by the SMMT and RMI. Perhaps you were there? Over 5,500 garages have already signed up. It’s the employer that’s key to this. The MISR CoP will be launched to the public in August.
What is so disappointing is that AMA is being put forward as some kind of solution, but a solution to what? As for the IMI’s CiAM - Level 3 is it? So equivalent to one A Level. Very useful.
FF.
What happens next with ARMS? I suspect that it will disappear as soon as AMA is up and running. My concern is AMA will become like the old CSE or HND - virtually worthless when compared to O or A Levels.
AMA appears to be pandering to the lowest common denominator. ARMS has to be tough - only the best will achieve it. The CPD element would also give insight to the individuals taking it.
The bit that’s missing from all the Press releases is the way AMA integrates with ARMs and that AMA is to ARMS as an A Level is to a Degree. You get a sense that they see it as something completely different - AMA is where its at, ARMS tool long/hard etc, lets hope it withers and dies and can be quietly forgotten. In other words - an MBA is too hard and takes too long so we’ll stick with A Levels. The reason an MBA is valued so highly is the very fact that only the best get one and they do that through a committment to a shed load of study.
There is a huge job to be done (by IMI) to start getting employers to start the process of management development from a very early stage. The issue here is trying to get small businesses to invest in people when they fear that it will be wasted when that person disappears off to a competitor.
I see no attempt what so ever by IMI to state that ARMS is the benchmark by which the best will be judged and that Level 3 Cert/AMA is a stepping stone in that process.
What the industry needs is a complete suite of management qualifications that allow progression from Team Leader up to Dealer Principal / Director. The top levels are catered for by ARMS and B.Sc & M.Sc. available through Loughborough University. First line management roles now have the IMI level 3. We need team leader qualifications at level 2 and a broader version of the level 3 to provide the stepping stone of level 4.
Other professional bodies such as ILM and CMI already have qualifications that could be adapted and contextualised to suit the dealer network.
AMA has not yet been developed, so debates and consultation on what it should look like are very healthy - by all means get involved and have your say - the IMI would welcome that.
The key point is how the qualifications are assessed. I would much rather see practical assignments that contribute to the improvement of the business or on-the-job assessments of competence rather than academic exercises that add no value to businesses - I’m sure that most Dealer Principals would agree with me on that one!
Roger
Roger,
Thanks for the response which is most helpful. I appreciate that its early days for AMA but it does feel that it will go down the NVQ - evidence based as opposed to the academic route. I have no real issue with this in principle, my only concern will be derived by what level it is pitched. If you have an evidence based approach up running alongside an academic CiAM or ARMS (ie at a similar level)this may cause confusion.
I thought the originla intention of ARMS was to balance academic Part I with practical/evidence based Part II. Did I misunderstand that?
Sarah Sillars has posted the following clarification at AM-online, where the debate rages:
In an attempt to minimise the fiction, innuendo and guesswork please let me add to some of the facts featured in the healthy debate on AMA.
Automotive Skills is now a brand division of the IMI. Automotive Skills is responsible under government license to set National Occupational Standards ( NOS ) for those working in the Retail Automotive Sector i.e those working downstream from the factory gates. It is responsible for Apprenticeship frameworks and for instigating exemplary research, known as Labour Market Intelligence in order to prepare for the skills requirements in our industry for the future
The IMI is now a combined Professional Body and Sector Skills Council with the overriding desire and commitment to give more status, employability and recognition for people in our industry. The SSC part of this equation is aiming to give employers more of what they want and less of what they have had to have to get funded qualifications. We have had dialogue with 700 employers since last November and have been told time and time again that employers want bite-sized chunks of learning that lead to qualifications that will assist productivity and profitability.No-one wants training for training sake.
ARMS is a set of Automotive Retail Management Standards and inherently there is nothing wrong with them. What was wrong was that were not enough people who could combine a full time demanding, pressured day job, having in many circumstance to learn to study again and amongst all of this try and keep a happy home life with a reasonable work -life balance. The qualifications are high level with no natural progression routes. Most people achieve when progressing through the levels, not when trying to make a quantum leap.
ATA was born out of a desire to provide competent industry people with a currency, like CORGI gas engineers or Licensed electricians. It provides a common occupational benchmark that can be delivered by any provider or manufacturer that can provide the practical and theoretical assessments, to the right standards. Nearly 10,000 have now achieved this and it must be said that many are very proud to have that recognition.It is robust and will hold water if we as an industry get mandatory licensing. It currently is renewable every five years
So AMA, - what will it be? We are trying to provide a similar benchmark for Management and Leadership, because we understand and accept that one qualification is not necessarily the only route. So a Management and Leadership offer that will have different interventions not just one? There is a lot of very good training out there but as contributors to the debate have pointed out often training and development is different for different companies. Can we find a way to provide an umbrella to recognise the differences, where they meet a consistent standard we hope so. We are prepared to try - you can help us
You can be involved - instead of debating privately why not join those that want to give the status to those managers who are as competent as those in other industries? Today, Tuesday June 24th we have our second Working Party, people prepared to give time and input to this area. We accept that different inputs can lead to the same standards of knowledge, behaviour and skills. We want to be able to recognise this. Join in and help the industry move forward. Lots of able people don’t have the recognition they deserve.
If you are able to assist and help us directly please contact Ann on anns@motor.org.uk
Thank you
It’s too easy to sit on the sidelines and critisise - get involved and help change things for the better!
Don’t confuse criticising with commenting - there is a world of difference.
After carefully reading the comment given by Sarah Sillars above, it would appear that ATA and the soon to be AMA are not actually qualifications as first reported, but rather a “voluntary Assessment”.
The IMI have stated that the ARMS qualification will remain in place as a level 5 qualification and the new AMA Assessment will be pitched at a lower level.
Reading between the lines, one could ask the question, “Is this the first attempt at licensing or regulating management within the Motor Industry?”
Personally, I would welcome such a move providing that the regulatory body is focussed on continuous professional development for all. This must be the only industry where people are promoted into management positions without any period of transition or training for their new job.
If it is the role of AMA to provide a sensible career progression between job roles, then I think it will be welcomed with open arms.