Drive on: lessons from the mechanics

An auto-repair firm gave mechanics inspection checklists and required them to submit the completed forms to a supervisor. Revenue increased by 20% during the experiment.

The checklists prompted more thorough inspections, leading to more repairs being carried out. They helped mechanics remember checks they might otherwise skip, while giving supervisors a record of what had been inspected.

But when supervisors stopped collecting the forms, mechanics stopped using them, despite having blank copies available. Revenue returned to its previous level.

Why abandon something that worked? The researchers’ explanation is simple: there wasn’t enough in it for the mechanics. More thorough inspections required extra work. Mechanics received only a share of the additional revenue, while bearing the full effort involved.

This should help us rethink how we might interpret resistance to a new process. Management can see a clear improvement while employees experience an additional demand with limited personal benefit.

Before introducing another template or system, ask what it requires from the person using it. Does it save them time, help them do better work or give them a fair return for extra effort?

A process with a plus for the person using it - is a process that sticks.

This study also speaks to the value of a checklist - but I feel that’s well understood!

Source: Jackson, C. K., & Schneider, H. S. (2015). Checklists and worker behavior: A field experiment. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 7(4), 136–168.