CDPs will be as inaccurate as CRMs

[Alex Snyder]

Saturday morning coffee thought…

In an industry where the incentive to be accurate with customer data is for transactional purposes, the only source of accurate data will be the transactional softwares. That is the DMS today.

As long as we have customers who try to mask themselves (leads), salespeople who don’t value data, and service writers who are rushed any of the softwares with “customer” in the name will never reach full potential.

We know the flaws of CRM all too well and we know how well the fancy stuff on top works due to the basic foundations of inaccuracies corrupting the greater features. Especially reports. Any CRM report that focuses on leads needs to be highly scrutinized, for example.

How can a CDP be any better? Is it going to give you 70% accuracy? 60%? 50%? Is it possible to know and will that accuracy remain constant or ebb? If it is inaccurate, how accurate are your decisions? If you’re the main person in your dealership making calls off this system, might it be a good idea to remind yourself that “black and white” stuff on your screen is incredibly grey?

 

[Carsten]

This sounds like companies who try to track an employee down to the 15 minute intervals hoping to increase their productivity.

If you want to get meaningful data you will need to be draconian in the reporting.
Or you have to have a system that has such a low barrier to entry that people will do it.
And you have to have leadership willing to put their mark on it and own it.

 

[Jon Singo]

Saturday morning coffee thought…

In an industry where the incentive to be accurate with customer data is for transactional purposes, the only source of accurate data will be the transactional softwares. That is the DMS today.

As long as we have customers who try to mask themselves (leads), salespeople who don’t value data, and service writers who are rushed any of the softwares with “customer” in the name will never reach full potential.

We know the flaws of CRM all too well and we know how well the fancy stuff on top works due to the basic foundations of inaccuracies corrupting the greater features. Especially reports. Any CRM report that focuses on leads needs to be highly scrutinized, for example.

How can a CDP be any better? Is it going to give you 70% accuracy? 60%? 50%? Is it possible to know and will that accuracy remain constant or ebb? If it is inaccurate, how accurate are your decisions? If you’re the main person in your dealership making calls off this system, might it be a good idea to remind yourself that “black and white” stuff on your screen is incredibly grey?

This is a great point. Systems are only as good as the data entered into them. If you have poor data practices with a CRM, your shiny new CDP is going to suffer a similar fate. Garbage in, garbage out.

Anyone working on a system to automatically clean up CRM/CDPs using PII publicly available, matching to what you have entered in the platform? Is that even feasible?

 

[jscole86]

This is a great point. Systems are only as good as the data entered into them. If you have poor data practices with a CRM, your shiny new CDP is going to suffer a similar fate. Garbage in, garbage out.

Anyone working on a system to automatically clean up CRM/CDPs using PII publicly available, matching to what you have entered in the platform? Is that even feasible?

I actually just had a call this morning with Authenticom, about cleaning up the DMS and CRM (DealerTrack DMS / Vinsolutions). They have the ability to do all of that. The issue I'm working on is how I get the updated info back into the DMS and CRM. We don't have a CDP.

 

[todd.smith]

The conversation around automotive retail data always seems to focus on adding more layers – more software, more integration, more complexity. But what if we're thinking about it backward?

Instead of building bigger silos or fancier bridges between them, what if the future is actually about decentralization? Picture a system where data lives and updates wherever it naturally occurs, but stays connected through a real-time verification network. Each piece of information would maintain its independence while contributing to a larger, validated ecosystem.

The key insight here isn't about consolidating everything into one massive database – it's about creating a framework where data can be trusted because it's constantly being verified against multiple real-world touchpoints. When a customer shows up in service, makes a payment, or interacts with your dealership in any way, that interaction automatically validates and updates their information across the network.

This isn't just theoretical – the technology exists today to maintain data accuracy through distributed validation rather than centralized control. Think blockchain principles applied to customer data: every interaction becomes a verification point, building a web of trust rather than a tower of assumptions.

The beauty of this approach is that it works with human nature rather than against it. Instead of forcing everyone to be perfect data entry clerks, the system naturally cleanses and validates information through actual customer interactions. Bad data gets filtered out because it can't survive real-world verification.

This might be the paradigm shift we've been waiting for in automotive retail data management – not bigger databases, but smarter networks.

 

[BillKVMotorCo]

The conversation around automotive retail data always seems to focus on adding more layers – more software, more integration, more complexity. But what if we're thinking about it backward?

Instead of building bigger silos or fancier bridges between them, what if the future is actually about decentralization? Picture a system where data lives and updates wherever it naturally occurs, but stays connected through a real-time verification network. Each piece of information would maintain its independence while contributing to a larger, validated ecosystem.

The key insight here isn't about consolidating everything into one massive database – it's about creating a framework where data can be trusted because it's constantly being verified against multiple real-world touchpoints. When a customer shows up in service, makes a payment, or interacts with your dealership in any way, that interaction automatically validates and updates their information across the network.

This isn't just theoretical – the technology exists today to maintain data accuracy through distributed validation rather than centralized control. Think blockchain principles applied to customer data: every interaction becomes a verification point, building a web of trust rather than a tower of assumptions.

The beauty of this approach is that it works with human nature rather than against it. Instead of forcing everyone to be perfect data entry clerks, the system naturally cleanses and validates information through actual customer interactions. Bad data gets filtered out because it can't survive real-world verification.

This might be the paradigm shift we've been waiting for in automotive retail data management – not bigger databases, but smarter networks.

The important part is that dealers will need to use this information for good and not evil. This data should provide information that helps us serve the guest better and with a more tailored approach. If we look at this information purely from a "someone contact them and try to sell them" approach, the data won't be useful. This is what I have struggled with as I've looked at CDP data. It's kind of cool info to have, but how does it help me sell the guest a car? I haven't seen that there is enough detail to be able to do that.

 

[Carsten]

Blockchain ownership is probably the next evolution of the cart title and car fax style of data.
the big hurdle is the OEM and who will be primary guardian and maintainer of that that data format.

Apple, Google, Microsoft have trouble deciding on HTML / CSS / Javascript implementation and support how can we expect 20 manufacturers to agree?

 

[AlexCaradonna]

Blockchain ownership is probably the next evolution of the cart title and car fax style of data.
the big hurdle is the OEM and who will be primary guardian and maintainer of that that data format.

Apple, Google, Microsoft have trouble deciding on HTML / CSS / Javascript implementation and support how can we expect 20 manufacturers to agree?

https://www.reuters.com/technology/california-dmv-puts-42-million-car-titles-blockchain-fight-fraud-2024-07-30/

 

[Tallcool1]

To me, this is a very interesting post. I came to many of these conclusions a few years back. When it was time to build out the lead attribution and reporting in my CRM, I asked myself the same questions that are being discussed here.

Should I assume that the only value in a 3rd Party Marketplace is the actual lead?
Do I want my dealers/myself to draw this assumption?
Do I want to build a mini dashboard for these Marketplaces and therefore cause users/myself to never check CRM data against actual data?
Do I want my dealers/myself to trust this data to the degree that business decisions will be made based upon it?
Does this help anyone sell a car?

I decided against it. I can't build a better dashboard than the dashboard that each Marketplace already has. I can't access VDP Views, SRP Appearances, and most other data that is probably more valuable than the actual Lead Data.

I believe that less complexity is an improvement. Let the complexity live where it already lives and keep it there.

 

[Jon Singo]

The important part is that dealers will need to use this information for good and not evil. This data should provide information that helps us serve the guest better and with a more tailored approach. If we look at this information purely from a "someone contact them and try to sell them" approach, the data won't be useful. This is what I have struggled with as I've looked at CDP data. It's kind of cool info to have, but how does it help me sell the guest a car? I haven't seen that there is enough detail to be able to do that.

Dealer acquires new tool/service/technology promising ROI if used properly. Dealer abuses new tool/service/technology against the provider's advisement. Dealer complains new tool/service/technology doesn't work for them and cancels.

Tale as old as time itself.