Tue, 08/04/2009 - 14:35

SEMA News - August 2009

By Drew Hardin
Courtesy Source Interlink Media Archives

 

The Don

SEMA NEWS-AUGUST 2009-SEMA HERITAGEThe big man in the Milodon T-shirt is none other than Don Alderson, Milodon’s cofounder (and the “don” in Milodon). Though this archive find came with no information, the location is obviously Bonneville, and the man in the Autolite shirt and what looks to be a ’66 or ’67 GTO in the distance leads us to believe that the shot was taken in 1967. That year, Autolite asked Alderson to build a land-speed-racing Ford 427 SOHC engine for the Herda-Knapp-Milodon streamliner as a tribute to Henry Ford’s speed records set 40 years before on Daytona Beach. The ’liner was already a proven record-setter, and the 357-mph mark it posted with the Cammer on board would stand for nearly 30 years.

Though Milodon was one of SEMA’s original founding companies, Alderson, with his friend Milo Franklin, started the business in 1957 as a maker of aircraft and missile components. Alderson was an active racer on the salt, the dry lakes and at the drags, and he used the Milodon shop to build components for his own race cars. Fellow racers learned about, and asked for, Alderson’s custom-made speed equipment, and the volume of racing parts coming out of the Milodon facility soon transformed its focus from aero to automotive.

Tue, 08/04/2009 - 14:35

SEMA NEWS - August 2009

By John Zinn
Illustration Colby Martin

 

Get Your Thinking And Strategy Headed Toward Efficiency And Accuracy

  SEMA News-August 2009-Data 01
  Make sure that you always spell the same information the same every time you use it. Example: Chevy and Chevrolet. We all know each of these are the same, but the computer sees two distinct makes.

The list contained below should be used as a very basic litmus test as to the usefulness of your electronic product information. Correcting or addressing all of these issues does not equal standards compliance, but it will serve to get you headed in the right direction and redirect your overall thinking and strategy.

It will also increase the efficiency and accuracy with which your product information is made available to the consumer. If you haven’t done so, please take the time to read the other articles in this issue relating to product data/product information to better understand how absolutely critical it is that you take a good, hard, honest look at what you are currently calling your “product data.”

1. PDFs Are Not Data Files: PDFs, Word documents, read-only files of any type, heavily formatted Excel files (more on this in rule number two) and any other file format that is not “relational” should never be used for electronic product information distribution. The single most universally accepted and flexible format is .CSV (comma separated values). You should always have a copy of your product information in .CSV for immediate distribution.

2. Product Data Isn’t Pretty: This relates primarily to Excel files and is one of the most common errors made in data/product information formatting and distribution. The tendency to want to “dress up” the file with colors, fonts, graphics and otherwise mimic the appearance of a catalog page renders the information contained within that file virtually useless to anybody wishing to make electronic use of the same. Good product data isn’t pretty; don’t try to force it to be so. It’s okay to have a separate file for human consumption that is dressed up, but don’t ever send that to somebody asking for electronic product information.

3. Computers Aren’t Auto Enthusiasts: Never combine information in a single data field, even if you and everybody else in the industry know exactly what it means. Electronically, product information is stored, manipulated and displayed by leveraging simple relationships between data points. If you have any data fields that look like this…

SEMA News-August 2009-Data 02

…you are guilty of this critical error. A computer cannot possibly know which model belongs to which make. Each of these “relationships” must be firm and one to one. One make to one model. Period. Repeat this for the same part number as many times as it takes to keep a one-to-one relationship between all data points.

4. Spelling Counts: Make sure that you always spell the same information the same every time you use it. Example: Chevy and Chevrolet. We all know each of these are the same, but the computer sees two distinct makes. If this were imported into a website as is, for example, the vehicle selection drop-down menu would offer you both choices—Chevy and Chevrolet. Which do you choose? And each selection will display only the products listed with that spelling. So the customer or counter/phone salesmen won’t see everything that’s available regardless of his selection.

5. Asterisks, Footnotes and Caveats: You make a part that fits an F-150 but not the Harley-Davidson model. So you do the very human thing and list that part number thusly: “Make: Ford, Model: F-150*.” Then, someplace else in the file, you say: “*Does not fit Harley-Davidson model.” As with the spelling in rule number four and the relationships in rule number three, the computer has no idea what you mean. It only sees a new model—F-150*—and some extraneous data elsewhere that isn’t related to anything (the footnote). This logical error will either crash the program or simply drop the information as unusable/unrelated. All such qualifications, footnotes, etc., should exist in their own data field directly related to the part number that they reference.

Learn more about standards and find resources.


John Zinn is the senior vice president of Advanced Digital Strategies and the chairman of the communications subcommittee of the SEMA Business Technology Committee . He may be contacted via e-mail at jzinn@digstrat.com or via telephone at 949/528-6522.

Tue, 08/04/2009 - 14:35

SEMA NEWS - August 2009

By John Zinn
Illustration Colby Martin

 

Get Your Thinking And Strategy Headed Toward Efficiency And Accuracy

  SEMA News-August 2009-Data 01
  Make sure that you always spell the same information the same every time you use it. Example: Chevy and Chevrolet. We all know each of these are the same, but the computer sees two distinct makes.

The list contained below should be used as a very basic litmus test as to the usefulness of your electronic product information. Correcting or addressing all of these issues does not equal standards compliance, but it will serve to get you headed in the right direction and redirect your overall thinking and strategy.

It will also increase the efficiency and accuracy with which your product information is made available to the consumer. If you haven’t done so, please take the time to read the other articles in this issue relating to product data/product information to better understand how absolutely critical it is that you take a good, hard, honest look at what you are currently calling your “product data.”

1. PDFs Are Not Data Files: PDFs, Word documents, read-only files of any type, heavily formatted Excel files (more on this in rule number two) and any other file format that is not “relational” should never be used for electronic product information distribution. The single most universally accepted and flexible format is .CSV (comma separated values). You should always have a copy of your product information in .CSV for immediate distribution.

2. Product Data Isn’t Pretty: This relates primarily to Excel files and is one of the most common errors made in data/product information formatting and distribution. The tendency to want to “dress up” the file with colors, fonts, graphics and otherwise mimic the appearance of a catalog page renders the information contained within that file virtually useless to anybody wishing to make electronic use of the same. Good product data isn’t pretty; don’t try to force it to be so. It’s okay to have a separate file for human consumption that is dressed up, but don’t ever send that to somebody asking for electronic product information.

3. Computers Aren’t Auto Enthusiasts: Never combine information in a single data field, even if you and everybody else in the industry know exactly what it means. Electronically, product information is stored, manipulated and displayed by leveraging simple relationships between data points. If you have any data fields that look like this…

SEMA News-August 2009-Data 02

…you are guilty of this critical error. A computer cannot possibly know which model belongs to which make. Each of these “relationships” must be firm and one to one. One make to one model. Period. Repeat this for the same part number as many times as it takes to keep a one-to-one relationship between all data points.

4. Spelling Counts: Make sure that you always spell the same information the same every time you use it. Example: Chevy and Chevrolet. We all know each of these are the same, but the computer sees two distinct makes. If this were imported into a website as is, for example, the vehicle selection drop-down menu would offer you both choices—Chevy and Chevrolet. Which do you choose? And each selection will display only the products listed with that spelling. So the customer or counter/phone salesmen won’t see everything that’s available regardless of his selection.

5. Asterisks, Footnotes and Caveats: You make a part that fits an F-150 but not the Harley-Davidson model. So you do the very human thing and list that part number thusly: “Make: Ford, Model: F-150*.” Then, someplace else in the file, you say: “*Does not fit Harley-Davidson model.” As with the spelling in rule number four and the relationships in rule number three, the computer has no idea what you mean. It only sees a new model—F-150*—and some extraneous data elsewhere that isn’t related to anything (the footnote). This logical error will either crash the program or simply drop the information as unusable/unrelated. All such qualifications, footnotes, etc., should exist in their own data field directly related to the part number that they reference.

Learn more about standards and find resources.


John Zinn is the senior vice president of Advanced Digital Strategies and the chairman of the communications subcommittee of the SEMA Business Technology Committee . He may be contacted via e-mail at jzinn@digstrat.com or via telephone at 949/528-6522.

Tue, 08/04/2009 - 14:35

SEMA NEWS - August 2009

By John Zinn
Illustration Colby Martin

 

Get Your Thinking And Strategy Headed Toward Efficiency And Accuracy

  SEMA News-August 2009-Data 01
  Make sure that you always spell the same information the same every time you use it. Example: Chevy and Chevrolet. We all know each of these are the same, but the computer sees two distinct makes.

The list contained below should be used as a very basic litmus test as to the usefulness of your electronic product information. Correcting or addressing all of these issues does not equal standards compliance, but it will serve to get you headed in the right direction and redirect your overall thinking and strategy.

It will also increase the efficiency and accuracy with which your product information is made available to the consumer. If you haven’t done so, please take the time to read the other articles in this issue relating to product data/product information to better understand how absolutely critical it is that you take a good, hard, honest look at what you are currently calling your “product data.”

1. PDFs Are Not Data Files: PDFs, Word documents, read-only files of any type, heavily formatted Excel files (more on this in rule number two) and any other file format that is not “relational” should never be used for electronic product information distribution. The single most universally accepted and flexible format is .CSV (comma separated values). You should always have a copy of your product information in .CSV for immediate distribution.

2. Product Data Isn’t Pretty: This relates primarily to Excel files and is one of the most common errors made in data/product information formatting and distribution. The tendency to want to “dress up” the file with colors, fonts, graphics and otherwise mimic the appearance of a catalog page renders the information contained within that file virtually useless to anybody wishing to make electronic use of the same. Good product data isn’t pretty; don’t try to force it to be so. It’s okay to have a separate file for human consumption that is dressed up, but don’t ever send that to somebody asking for electronic product information.

3. Computers Aren’t Auto Enthusiasts: Never combine information in a single data field, even if you and everybody else in the industry know exactly what it means. Electronically, product information is stored, manipulated and displayed by leveraging simple relationships between data points. If you have any data fields that look like this…

SEMA News-August 2009-Data 02

…you are guilty of this critical error. A computer cannot possibly know which model belongs to which make. Each of these “relationships” must be firm and one to one. One make to one model. Period. Repeat this for the same part number as many times as it takes to keep a one-to-one relationship between all data points.

4. Spelling Counts: Make sure that you always spell the same information the same every time you use it. Example: Chevy and Chevrolet. We all know each of these are the same, but the computer sees two distinct makes. If this were imported into a website as is, for example, the vehicle selection drop-down menu would offer you both choices—Chevy and Chevrolet. Which do you choose? And each selection will display only the products listed with that spelling. So the customer or counter/phone salesmen won’t see everything that’s available regardless of his selection.

5. Asterisks, Footnotes and Caveats: You make a part that fits an F-150 but not the Harley-Davidson model. So you do the very human thing and list that part number thusly: “Make: Ford, Model: F-150*.” Then, someplace else in the file, you say: “*Does not fit Harley-Davidson model.” As with the spelling in rule number four and the relationships in rule number three, the computer has no idea what you mean. It only sees a new model—F-150*—and some extraneous data elsewhere that isn’t related to anything (the footnote). This logical error will either crash the program or simply drop the information as unusable/unrelated. All such qualifications, footnotes, etc., should exist in their own data field directly related to the part number that they reference.

Learn more about standards and find resources.


John Zinn is the senior vice president of Advanced Digital Strategies and the chairman of the communications subcommittee of the SEMA Business Technology Committee . He may be contacted via e-mail at jzinn@digstrat.com or via telephone at 949/528-6522.

Tue, 08/04/2009 - 14:35

SEMA NEWS - August 2009

By John Zinn
Illustration Colby Martin

 

Get Your Thinking And Strategy Headed Toward Efficiency And Accuracy

  SEMA News-August 2009-Data 01
  Make sure that you always spell the same information the same every time you use it. Example: Chevy and Chevrolet. We all know each of these are the same, but the computer sees two distinct makes.

The list contained below should be used as a very basic litmus test as to the usefulness of your electronic product information. Correcting or addressing all of these issues does not equal standards compliance, but it will serve to get you headed in the right direction and redirect your overall thinking and strategy.

It will also increase the efficiency and accuracy with which your product information is made available to the consumer. If you haven’t done so, please take the time to read the other articles in this issue relating to product data/product information to better understand how absolutely critical it is that you take a good, hard, honest look at what you are currently calling your “product data.”

1. PDFs Are Not Data Files: PDFs, Word documents, read-only files of any type, heavily formatted Excel files (more on this in rule number two) and any other file format that is not “relational” should never be used for electronic product information distribution. The single most universally accepted and flexible format is .CSV (comma separated values). You should always have a copy of your product information in .CSV for immediate distribution.

2. Product Data Isn’t Pretty: This relates primarily to Excel files and is one of the most common errors made in data/product information formatting and distribution. The tendency to want to “dress up” the file with colors, fonts, graphics and otherwise mimic the appearance of a catalog page renders the information contained within that file virtually useless to anybody wishing to make electronic use of the same. Good product data isn’t pretty; don’t try to force it to be so. It’s okay to have a separate file for human consumption that is dressed up, but don’t ever send that to somebody asking for electronic product information.

3. Computers Aren’t Auto Enthusiasts: Never combine information in a single data field, even if you and everybody else in the industry know exactly what it means. Electronically, product information is stored, manipulated and displayed by leveraging simple relationships between data points. If you have any data fields that look like this…

SEMA News-August 2009-Data 02

…you are guilty of this critical error. A computer cannot possibly know which model belongs to which make. Each of these “relationships” must be firm and one to one. One make to one model. Period. Repeat this for the same part number as many times as it takes to keep a one-to-one relationship between all data points.

4. Spelling Counts: Make sure that you always spell the same information the same every time you use it. Example: Chevy and Chevrolet. We all know each of these are the same, but the computer sees two distinct makes. If this were imported into a website as is, for example, the vehicle selection drop-down menu would offer you both choices—Chevy and Chevrolet. Which do you choose? And each selection will display only the products listed with that spelling. So the customer or counter/phone salesmen won’t see everything that’s available regardless of his selection.

5. Asterisks, Footnotes and Caveats: You make a part that fits an F-150 but not the Harley-Davidson model. So you do the very human thing and list that part number thusly: “Make: Ford, Model: F-150*.” Then, someplace else in the file, you say: “*Does not fit Harley-Davidson model.” As with the spelling in rule number four and the relationships in rule number three, the computer has no idea what you mean. It only sees a new model—F-150*—and some extraneous data elsewhere that isn’t related to anything (the footnote). This logical error will either crash the program or simply drop the information as unusable/unrelated. All such qualifications, footnotes, etc., should exist in their own data field directly related to the part number that they reference.

Learn more about standards and find resources.


John Zinn is the senior vice president of Advanced Digital Strategies and the chairman of the communications subcommittee of the SEMA Business Technology Committee . He may be contacted via e-mail at jzinn@digstrat.com or via telephone at 949/528-6522.

Tue, 08/04/2009 - 14:35

SEMA NEWS - August 2009

By John Zinn
Illustration Colby Martin

 

Get Your Thinking And Strategy Headed Toward Efficiency And Accuracy

  SEMA News-August 2009-Data 01
  Make sure that you always spell the same information the same every time you use it. Example: Chevy and Chevrolet. We all know each of these are the same, but the computer sees two distinct makes.

The list contained below should be used as a very basic litmus test as to the usefulness of your electronic product information. Correcting or addressing all of these issues does not equal standards compliance, but it will serve to get you headed in the right direction and redirect your overall thinking and strategy.

It will also increase the efficiency and accuracy with which your product information is made available to the consumer. If you haven’t done so, please take the time to read the other articles in this issue relating to product data/product information to better understand how absolutely critical it is that you take a good, hard, honest look at what you are currently calling your “product data.”

1. PDFs Are Not Data Files: PDFs, Word documents, read-only files of any type, heavily formatted Excel files (more on this in rule number two) and any other file format that is not “relational” should never be used for electronic product information distribution. The single most universally accepted and flexible format is .CSV (comma separated values). You should always have a copy of your product information in .CSV for immediate distribution.

2. Product Data Isn’t Pretty: This relates primarily to Excel files and is one of the most common errors made in data/product information formatting and distribution. The tendency to want to “dress up” the file with colors, fonts, graphics and otherwise mimic the appearance of a catalog page renders the information contained within that file virtually useless to anybody wishing to make electronic use of the same. Good product data isn’t pretty; don’t try to force it to be so. It’s okay to have a separate file for human consumption that is dressed up, but don’t ever send that to somebody asking for electronic product information.

3. Computers Aren’t Auto Enthusiasts: Never combine information in a single data field, even if you and everybody else in the industry know exactly what it means. Electronically, product information is stored, manipulated and displayed by leveraging simple relationships between data points. If you have any data fields that look like this…

SEMA News-August 2009-Data 02

…you are guilty of this critical error. A computer cannot possibly know which model belongs to which make. Each of these “relationships” must be firm and one to one. One make to one model. Period. Repeat this for the same part number as many times as it takes to keep a one-to-one relationship between all data points.

4. Spelling Counts: Make sure that you always spell the same information the same every time you use it. Example: Chevy and Chevrolet. We all know each of these are the same, but the computer sees two distinct makes. If this were imported into a website as is, for example, the vehicle selection drop-down menu would offer you both choices—Chevy and Chevrolet. Which do you choose? And each selection will display only the products listed with that spelling. So the customer or counter/phone salesmen won’t see everything that’s available regardless of his selection.

5. Asterisks, Footnotes and Caveats: You make a part that fits an F-150 but not the Harley-Davidson model. So you do the very human thing and list that part number thusly: “Make: Ford, Model: F-150*.” Then, someplace else in the file, you say: “*Does not fit Harley-Davidson model.” As with the spelling in rule number four and the relationships in rule number three, the computer has no idea what you mean. It only sees a new model—F-150*—and some extraneous data elsewhere that isn’t related to anything (the footnote). This logical error will either crash the program or simply drop the information as unusable/unrelated. All such qualifications, footnotes, etc., should exist in their own data field directly related to the part number that they reference.

Learn more about standards and find resources.


John Zinn is the senior vice president of Advanced Digital Strategies and the chairman of the communications subcommittee of the SEMA Business Technology Committee . He may be contacted via e-mail at jzinn@digstrat.com or via telephone at 949/528-6522.

Tue, 08/04/2009 - 14:35

SEMA NEWS - August 2009

By John Zinn
Illustration Colby Martin

 

Get Your Thinking And Strategy Headed Toward Efficiency And Accuracy

  SEMA News-August 2009-Data 01
  Make sure that you always spell the same information the same every time you use it. Example: Chevy and Chevrolet. We all know each of these are the same, but the computer sees two distinct makes.

The list contained below should be used as a very basic litmus test as to the usefulness of your electronic product information. Correcting or addressing all of these issues does not equal standards compliance, but it will serve to get you headed in the right direction and redirect your overall thinking and strategy.

It will also increase the efficiency and accuracy with which your product information is made available to the consumer. If you haven’t done so, please take the time to read the other articles in this issue relating to product data/product information to better understand how absolutely critical it is that you take a good, hard, honest look at what you are currently calling your “product data.”

1. PDFs Are Not Data Files: PDFs, Word documents, read-only files of any type, heavily formatted Excel files (more on this in rule number two) and any other file format that is not “relational” should never be used for electronic product information distribution. The single most universally accepted and flexible format is .CSV (comma separated values). You should always have a copy of your product information in .CSV for immediate distribution.

2. Product Data Isn’t Pretty: This relates primarily to Excel files and is one of the most common errors made in data/product information formatting and distribution. The tendency to want to “dress up” the file with colors, fonts, graphics and otherwise mimic the appearance of a catalog page renders the information contained within that file virtually useless to anybody wishing to make electronic use of the same. Good product data isn’t pretty; don’t try to force it to be so. It’s okay to have a separate file for human consumption that is dressed up, but don’t ever send that to somebody asking for electronic product information.

3. Computers Aren’t Auto Enthusiasts: Never combine information in a single data field, even if you and everybody else in the industry know exactly what it means. Electronically, product information is stored, manipulated and displayed by leveraging simple relationships between data points. If you have any data fields that look like this…

SEMA News-August 2009-Data 02

…you are guilty of this critical error. A computer cannot possibly know which model belongs to which make. Each of these “relationships” must be firm and one to one. One make to one model. Period. Repeat this for the same part number as many times as it takes to keep a one-to-one relationship between all data points.

4. Spelling Counts: Make sure that you always spell the same information the same every time you use it. Example: Chevy and Chevrolet. We all know each of these are the same, but the computer sees two distinct makes. If this were imported into a website as is, for example, the vehicle selection drop-down menu would offer you both choices—Chevy and Chevrolet. Which do you choose? And each selection will display only the products listed with that spelling. So the customer or counter/phone salesmen won’t see everything that’s available regardless of his selection.

5. Asterisks, Footnotes and Caveats: You make a part that fits an F-150 but not the Harley-Davidson model. So you do the very human thing and list that part number thusly: “Make: Ford, Model: F-150*.” Then, someplace else in the file, you say: “*Does not fit Harley-Davidson model.” As with the spelling in rule number four and the relationships in rule number three, the computer has no idea what you mean. It only sees a new model—F-150*—and some extraneous data elsewhere that isn’t related to anything (the footnote). This logical error will either crash the program or simply drop the information as unusable/unrelated. All such qualifications, footnotes, etc., should exist in their own data field directly related to the part number that they reference.

Learn more about standards and find resources.


John Zinn is the senior vice president of Advanced Digital Strategies and the chairman of the communications subcommittee of the SEMA Business Technology Committee . He may be contacted via e-mail at jzinn@digstrat.com or via telephone at 949/528-6522.

Tue, 08/04/2009 - 14:35

SEMA NEWS - August 2009

By John Zinn
Illustration Colby Martin

 

Get Your Thinking And Strategy Headed Toward Efficiency And Accuracy

  SEMA News-August 2009-Data 01
  Make sure that you always spell the same information the same every time you use it. Example: Chevy and Chevrolet. We all know each of these are the same, but the computer sees two distinct makes.

The list contained below should be used as a very basic litmus test as to the usefulness of your electronic product information. Correcting or addressing all of these issues does not equal standards compliance, but it will serve to get you headed in the right direction and redirect your overall thinking and strategy.

It will also increase the efficiency and accuracy with which your product information is made available to the consumer. If you haven’t done so, please take the time to read the other articles in this issue relating to product data/product information to better understand how absolutely critical it is that you take a good, hard, honest look at what you are currently calling your “product data.”

1. PDFs Are Not Data Files: PDFs, Word documents, read-only files of any type, heavily formatted Excel files (more on this in rule number two) and any other file format that is not “relational” should never be used for electronic product information distribution. The single most universally accepted and flexible format is .CSV (comma separated values). You should always have a copy of your product information in .CSV for immediate distribution.

2. Product Data Isn’t Pretty: This relates primarily to Excel files and is one of the most common errors made in data/product information formatting and distribution. The tendency to want to “dress up” the file with colors, fonts, graphics and otherwise mimic the appearance of a catalog page renders the information contained within that file virtually useless to anybody wishing to make electronic use of the same. Good product data isn’t pretty; don’t try to force it to be so. It’s okay to have a separate file for human consumption that is dressed up, but don’t ever send that to somebody asking for electronic product information.

3. Computers Aren’t Auto Enthusiasts: Never combine information in a single data field, even if you and everybody else in the industry know exactly what it means. Electronically, product information is stored, manipulated and displayed by leveraging simple relationships between data points. If you have any data fields that look like this…

SEMA News-August 2009-Data 02

…you are guilty of this critical error. A computer cannot possibly know which model belongs to which make. Each of these “relationships” must be firm and one to one. One make to one model. Period. Repeat this for the same part number as many times as it takes to keep a one-to-one relationship between all data points.

4. Spelling Counts: Make sure that you always spell the same information the same every time you use it. Example: Chevy and Chevrolet. We all know each of these are the same, but the computer sees two distinct makes. If this were imported into a website as is, for example, the vehicle selection drop-down menu would offer you both choices—Chevy and Chevrolet. Which do you choose? And each selection will display only the products listed with that spelling. So the customer or counter/phone salesmen won’t see everything that’s available regardless of his selection.

5. Asterisks, Footnotes and Caveats: You make a part that fits an F-150 but not the Harley-Davidson model. So you do the very human thing and list that part number thusly: “Make: Ford, Model: F-150*.” Then, someplace else in the file, you say: “*Does not fit Harley-Davidson model.” As with the spelling in rule number four and the relationships in rule number three, the computer has no idea what you mean. It only sees a new model—F-150*—and some extraneous data elsewhere that isn’t related to anything (the footnote). This logical error will either crash the program or simply drop the information as unusable/unrelated. All such qualifications, footnotes, etc., should exist in their own data field directly related to the part number that they reference.

Learn more about standards and find resources.


John Zinn is the senior vice president of Advanced Digital Strategies and the chairman of the communications subcommittee of the SEMA Business Technology Committee . He may be contacted via e-mail at jzinn@digstrat.com or via telephone at 949/528-6522.

Tue, 08/04/2009 - 14:35

SEMA NEWS - August 2009

By John Zinn
Illustration Colby Martin

 

Get Your Thinking And Strategy Headed Toward Efficiency And Accuracy

  SEMA News-August 2009-Data 01
  Make sure that you always spell the same information the same every time you use it. Example: Chevy and Chevrolet. We all know each of these are the same, but the computer sees two distinct makes.

The list contained below should be used as a very basic litmus test as to the usefulness of your electronic product information. Correcting or addressing all of these issues does not equal standards compliance, but it will serve to get you headed in the right direction and redirect your overall thinking and strategy.

It will also increase the efficiency and accuracy with which your product information is made available to the consumer. If you haven’t done so, please take the time to read the other articles in this issue relating to product data/product information to better understand how absolutely critical it is that you take a good, hard, honest look at what you are currently calling your “product data.”

1. PDFs Are Not Data Files: PDFs, Word documents, read-only files of any type, heavily formatted Excel files (more on this in rule number two) and any other file format that is not “relational” should never be used for electronic product information distribution. The single most universally accepted and flexible format is .CSV (comma separated values). You should always have a copy of your product information in .CSV for immediate distribution.

2. Product Data Isn’t Pretty: This relates primarily to Excel files and is one of the most common errors made in data/product information formatting and distribution. The tendency to want to “dress up” the file with colors, fonts, graphics and otherwise mimic the appearance of a catalog page renders the information contained within that file virtually useless to anybody wishing to make electronic use of the same. Good product data isn’t pretty; don’t try to force it to be so. It’s okay to have a separate file for human consumption that is dressed up, but don’t ever send that to somebody asking for electronic product information.

3. Computers Aren’t Auto Enthusiasts: Never combine information in a single data field, even if you and everybody else in the industry know exactly what it means. Electronically, product information is stored, manipulated and displayed by leveraging simple relationships between data points. If you have any data fields that look like this…

SEMA News-August 2009-Data 02

…you are guilty of this critical error. A computer cannot possibly know which model belongs to which make. Each of these “relationships” must be firm and one to one. One make to one model. Period. Repeat this for the same part number as many times as it takes to keep a one-to-one relationship between all data points.

4. Spelling Counts: Make sure that you always spell the same information the same every time you use it. Example: Chevy and Chevrolet. We all know each of these are the same, but the computer sees two distinct makes. If this were imported into a website as is, for example, the vehicle selection drop-down menu would offer you both choices—Chevy and Chevrolet. Which do you choose? And each selection will display only the products listed with that spelling. So the customer or counter/phone salesmen won’t see everything that’s available regardless of his selection.

5. Asterisks, Footnotes and Caveats: You make a part that fits an F-150 but not the Harley-Davidson model. So you do the very human thing and list that part number thusly: “Make: Ford, Model: F-150*.” Then, someplace else in the file, you say: “*Does not fit Harley-Davidson model.” As with the spelling in rule number four and the relationships in rule number three, the computer has no idea what you mean. It only sees a new model—F-150*—and some extraneous data elsewhere that isn’t related to anything (the footnote). This logical error will either crash the program or simply drop the information as unusable/unrelated. All such qualifications, footnotes, etc., should exist in their own data field directly related to the part number that they reference.

Learn more about standards and find resources.


John Zinn is the senior vice president of Advanced Digital Strategies and the chairman of the communications subcommittee of the SEMA Business Technology Committee . He may be contacted via e-mail at jzinn@digstrat.com or via telephone at 949/528-6522.

Tue, 08/04/2009 - 14:35

SEMA NEWS - AUGUST 2009

By Wayne Peterman
Illustration Colby Martin

 

How Lack of Standards and Poorly Supplied Information Can Cost Sales

  SEMA News-August 2009-Parts 01
 Almost every company is losing some level of sales because of this issue. Those that address it head on will be the first to reap the rewards.

About seven or eight months ago, a successful retail chain with a 20-year, 10-location brick-and-mortar history decided that it was time it competed on the web with a full e-commerce solution. The chain identified 200 product lines as mission critical for the launch of the site and set out to gather the necessary data.

An internal standard was created that was made as simple as possible to accommodate the known and massive variety of data formats expected to be returned. Calls were made, e-mails were sent and the waiting began. The data started to arrive in every possible format—PDFs, Word documents, Excel spreadsheets, .CSV files and even, in one case, a PowerPoint presentation.

It quickly became clear that the internal staff was not equipped to manage and normalize this massive and growing undertaking simply to get the product information up on the website. They sought alternatives, and data providers were contacted, WDs were contacted and manufacturers were re-contacted. In most cases, the solutions offered were cost prohibitive, restrictive and/or impractical. The process dragged on with little success.

After six months, the original 200 mission critical vendors were reluctantly reduced to 35 for launch—based not on the top 35 relative to sales potential but on the 35 that could reasonably be turned into usable data in the shortest amount of time. Six months and still nothing on the website; therefore, no website. Six months, now bleeding into the prime summer sales season, that this company could have been selling products for 200 different companies. Instead it was selling nothing, and the short term included opportunities for only those 35 that provided something relatively useful. Today, the chain is still fighting to go live.

This isn’t limited to just the web. More companies than not are using some form of electronic product information internally, as well, for counter sales, accounting, inventory, etc.

Beyond the aggravation of spending hours and money to format somebody else’s data— something that can create bitterness on the part of the retailer/distributor because its staff is having to work so hard just to sell your products—there are questions of accuracy and completeness in the absence of standards. When faced with thousands upon thousands of lines of data to sort through and/or create, a project can permanently stall when every part number raises questions. The retailer/distributor folks are faced with problems such as, “They only list ‘F-150’ as an application, but I’m pretty sure this doesn’t fit the Lightning sub-model.” So, more often than not, they guess. They simply cannot make a phone call or send an e-mail for every question. Guessing, of course, leads to errors and lack of confidence and, therefore, fewer sales and higher returns. If there are enough of these types of questions, errors and omissions, the retailer/distributor may decide it simply isn’t worth the effort—not right now, at least. They’ll stick it on the bottom of the stack and move on.

The bottom line is that addressing all these issues takes time, and time is expensive. It costs the vendor up front to pay the person converting the data, but the real cost comes from the delays in getting the products exposed to millions of potential buyers across the nation and the world. The good news is that there are people and resources to help. Almost every company is losing some level of sales because of this issue. Those that address it head on will be the first to reap the rewards.

Learn more about standards and find resources.


Wayne Peterman is the database/customer service manager at Foster, Babcock & Associates. He may be contacted via e-mail at wayne@fosterbabcock.com or via phone at 816/283-3355.