Featured Insights
Munich, April 2022
ith Vehicle as a Service (VaaS) expected to increase its market share by close to 33% by 2025, OEMs need to get ready for the impact on aftersales
The global aftersales business – parts sales and maintenance services
through the dealer network – is a major profit pool for automotive OEMs and
dealers. It accounts for as much as 40% of the overall profit of some carmakers
and large, full-range dealerships.
How did aftersales become such a stable cash cow? This is mainly attributable
to the fact that for vehicles under warranty, OEMs have close to no competition
for the service and care of the cars they sell as most customers remain loyal
to the manufacturer they bought the vehicle from. Once cars are passed on to
their second or third owners, OEMs increasingly face the competition of the independent aftermarket (IAM) – repair shops offering cheaper labor rates and
parts to customers who are more price sensitive.
To find out more, download our in-depth analysis!
Paul Kummer (1983) joined Berylls Strategy Advisors, an international strategy consultancy specializing in the automotive industry, as a partner in October 2021. He is an automotive downstream expert.
He has been advising automotive manufacturers in a global context since 2010. He has in-depth expert knowledge in the areas of sales and aftersales. His other areas of expertise include growth strategy development, business model development, portfolio optimization and digital transformation.
Prior to joining Berylls Strategy Advisors, he worked for Monitor Deloitte and Accenture.
Paul received his MBA from WHU Otto Beisheim School of Management and his Industrial Engineering degree from DHWB Mosbach.
Featured Insights
Munich, June 2022
n our recent viewpoint on NEVs in China we looked at China’s vital first-mover advantages in battery cell production and charging infrastructure and how critical it is for German and other foreign OEMs not to rely on their previous and current success with ICE vehicles.
There is no other way to put it: Chinese NEVs are leaving traditional German car brands far behind in the NEV sector, and not only in sales growth. Mainland customers are also giving Chinese NEVs rave reviews, as Berylls’ Big Data research reveals.
So, a swift reaction by German OEMs should be top of their CEOs’ agendas, in order to win back customer approval for their electric models and compete more effectively with China’s NEV start-ups. The following sales numbers in 2021 show the dramatically changing composition of China’s NEV market:
In contrast:
Now to be entirely fair: Each of the German OEMs mentioned above are coming up with numerous new NEVs that are entering the Chinese market this year. Volkswagen and Audi for instance are introducing the VW ID.5 and the Q5 e-tron this year.
Mercedes-Benz customers can prepare for a double debut: EQS and EQE are both celebrating their world premiere this year in China.
BMW goes even further: five pure electric products will be presented to the Chinese market: the BMW i3 (launched March 31st already), iX, iX3, i4 and i7.
Most of these models come with significant technological innovations and improvements that don’t just demonstrate a step forward under the hood but also at least equally important in China, visible for the customer in terms of a more “techie interior feeling” inside of the car.
However, NEVs are just the start of where we see a gap opening up between German and Chinese OEMs. The next area where German OEMs will need to catch up is already emerging: ICVs (Intelligent Connected Vehicles), a new collective term that stands for deep integration of connectivity and autonomous driving. And the risk is imminent that Chinese ICV players will repeatedly outcompete their German competitors.
During the recent „Two Sessions“ (the National People’s Congress and the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference), ICV and autonomous driving were one of the hot topics for the automotive industry. New laws and regulations were approved to promote the faster development of ICVs, with special emphasis on the implementation of autonomous driving.
ICVs are yet another case where one can see the advantage enjoyed by new Chinese players that can keep up with the dynamics of national policies and make rapid responses and adjustments. While traditional car companies are still studying „digital transformation and software defined vehicles“, these new Chinese players are already introducing them. Meanwhile, they have shifted their attention to ICV hardware and software upgrades for connectivity and autonomous driving functions.
For instance, the NIO ET7 has seven times the computational power of Tesla’s Hardware 3.0 (HW3.0), the US company’s AI self-driving hardware, released in 2019, which is deployed in the latest Tesla models. NIO’s Adam supercomputing platform within ET7 uses four NVIDIA Orin chips, with a total computational power of 1016 total operations per second (TOPS). In contrast, the computational power of Tesla’s HW3.0 is 144 TOPS.
Chinese players are also pioneering new sensors. For instance, Xpeng’s P5 uses a fusion of millimeter wave radar, camera and Lidar, while NVIDIA’s Xavier is used for autonomous driving (called XPilot), which can provide 30 TOPS of computational power. Equipped with twin Lidar sensors, the Xpeng P5 can deploy navigation-guided piloting (NGP) in urban environments. Moreover, the car roof is equipped with solar panels, which can provide 62W charging
But are Chinese players paying so much attention to ICVs, in particular spec and functionalities, as a means to extend their spec lists beyond their competition? Probably not.
It is more likely to be because they truly understand that “customer centricity” and digitalization go hand in hand. Customer demands are more diverse than ever before. It is not enough to offer just a digital customer interface with rich functions; in addition, timely software updates and rapid system upgrades are essential to react to these diverse and changing demands. All these capabilities require a strong technological base.
Even a traditional car with some smart functionality requires powerful hardware at the start of production (SOP). But updates are very limited and usually come with a facelift or at least require a physical service appointment. This means that car features are rigid, with little room for changes. Moreover, there is no application development ecosystem, with only a small range of applications developed by OEMs or Tier 1 suppliers.
However, with the advent of ICVs, hardware has become very powerful at the time of release as it has to have the ability to support future software updates. Software can be continuously updated remotely (over the air, or OTA) and new software functions added at any time (functions on demand, or FOD), while third party partners can engage in the development of software. The car’s functions and applications will be richer, since vehicle features are no longer rigid and can be extended via connection to the cloud. Chinese players have got the message that the accompanying hardware development cannot be ignored and must, more than ever, be a top priority.
To be fair, German players have not been sitting idle either.
For instance, the BMW iX is equipped with two Mobileye EyeQ5H chips, which are mainly used for visual perception processing. The computational power of a single chip is 24 TOPS. Two Intel Denverton 8-core processors, together with EQ5H, are responsible for data fusion, decision-making and planning.
However, according to BMW, this system only supports L3 level autonomous driving, as L4 / L5 levels require up to three EQ5H chips together with five Lidar sensors and seven cameras. A gap still exists with the current BMW iX configuration, which only has six sensing cameras, four surround cameras, one Lidar sensor, five millimeter wave radars and 12 ultrasonic radars.
VW Group, Mercedes-Benz and Audi do not make public as many specifics as BMW and are still at the planning stage. Audi has launched the Artemis Project, which will focus on new technologies including electrification and high-level autonomous driving. Its first model is due for release in 2024, with no further detailed information.
The same goes for Volkswagen, which will first launch Trinity, a flagship model to be produced in Wolfsburg and released in 2026. Again, there is no detailed information about the car.
Mercedes-Benz is cooperating with NVIDIA and has announced that the next generation of its models will use an NVIDIA platform, which will be launched in 2024.
It seems, therefore, that Chinese players are already far ahead when it comes to ICVs. They are putting out finished models while German players are still deciding what to do. Viewed from this angle, the traditional German players appear much slower than new Chinese competitors, which of course has a lot to do with the Germans’ scale, legacy and culture.
As customer demands become more unpredictable and competition increasingly fierce, staying ahead in China will become the overarching objective. This is why, in the digital era, customer centricity will remain the common key value for every NEV player. A genuine mindset shift from product-orientation to customer-orientation should be the starting point for all moves by all players along the value chain.
To be specific: What do customers want? How can OEMs make customer demands transparent? How can they translate customers’ expectations into real products and services? And how can OEMs systematically deploy customer requests along the entire value chain, to meet different individual needs? To answer these questions, OEMs need data.
We believe that data fusion, analysis and processing will greatly assist OEMs in creating transparency around present and future customer needs. It is therefore critical to design a data strategy and deploy dual systems for data analysis and action derivation.
From the outset, data is fundamental in creating strategy. Customer data is required to forecast future customer needs, demands and preferences, so that OEMs can develop a proactive rather than a reactive strategy. The entire value chain needs to be covered by the strategy which has customer-centricity at its core, hence the importance of data collection and analysis.
It is then time to review the strategy and proposed actions. Firstly, data needs to be collected, analyzed and processed in a modular way, so it can be classified into categories such as marketing, retail, customer interface, and products. Regular reviews and analysis of the collected data are required to determine the difference between customer expectations and the products or services provided by OEMs.
Secondly, it’s time to plan & start actions based on the results from each category, which need to be distributed to the relevant departments. Using this data, each department then needs to find solutions and actions that close the gap between customer reviews (for cars on the road and customers’ demands for future models) and adapt the existing strategy in the short, medium and long term. Deep integration of upstream and downstream functions is more essential than ever.
If there is one lesson to be learned from two years of COVID-19, resource shortages and now war, unfortunately, it is that OEMs can’t rely on strategies built on hypotheses and leadership experience. Instead, traditional German players should anticipate potential shocks, size up new situations, reposition themselves and master the rules of the new game as soon as possible. This change needs to happen in a structured way, rather than reactively following the trend. In particular, it’s time for them to rethink their whole value chain, redefine cars and be game-changers in the digital era when it comes to setting new trends and getting ahead of China’s agile and aggressive NEV start-ups.
Featured Insights
EMs know they need more flexibility in production – and soon – to meetdemand for greater individualization and better cost competitiveness. Here’s how...
Automakers’ need for production network flexibility has never been more urgent. Demand for customized vehicles is growing at the premium end of the
market, while at the volume end the opposite force prevails, and product complexity is being cut for cost reasons. Development cycles are growing ever-shorter, resulting in more frequent production-line changes, and increased geopolitical volatility is affecting demand and global supply chains. The last point has come to the fore in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, causing shortages from auto suppliers there.
Faced with these disruptive forces on both the demand and the supply side,
OEMs are taking more radical positions when it comes to the degree of product
individualization they offer, as well as what level of value creation will be kept inhouse. As a result, new production archetypes will emerge that will shape OEMs’ future manufacturing networks.
To read more, download our full report!
Heiko Weber (1972), Partner at Berylls Strategy Advisors, is an automotive expert in operations.
He started his career at the former DaimlerChrysler AG, where he worked for seven years and was most recently responsible for quality assurance and production of an engine line.
Since moving to Management Engineers in 2006, he has been contributing his experience and expertise to projects for automotive manufacturers as well as suppliers in development, purchasing, production and supply chain. Heiko Weber has extensive experience in the development of functional strategies in these areas and also possesses the operational management expertise to promptly catch critical situations in the supply chain through task force operations or to prevent them from occurring in the first place.
As a partner of Management Engineers, he accompanied the firm’s integration first into Booz & Co. and later into PwC Strategy&, where he was most recently responsible for the European automotive business until 2020.
Weber holds a degree in industrial engineering from the Technical University of Berlin and completed semesters abroad at Dublin City University in Marketing and Languages.
Featured Insights
ur analysis shows that some OEMs in Germany are spending up to half of their annual media budgets in Q4, the most expensive time of the year for advertising. Data shows consistently over time that this money is wasted, since concentrated spending does not translate into corresponding sales peaks. Instead, by leveraging data to improve their marketing planning and balancing spending throughout the year, these automakers could noticeably increase marketing efficiency.
Based on their marketing spending patterns, we split OEMs into two groups: larks, which plan early and allocate their media budget evenly across the year, and owls, which spend their media budget with a focus on the last quarter.
Over the past three years, we found that owls spent on average at least 50% more in the fourth quarter than the average of the previous three quarters. The bad news for this group is that spending more had no noticeable impact on website visits or new vehicle registrations (NVRs) in the final three months of the year. This means owls are spending 64% more per website visit and 58% more per NVR during that time. Berylls Mad Media works with clients to identify such money pits where budget is being wasted, to create a seamless loop between planning, financial tracking and campaign performance insights, and to drastically improve Marketing ROI.
To read more, download our full report!
Sascha Kurth (1987) is a Principal at Berylls Mad Media, the Sales & Marketing Transformation unit of Berylls Group, a group of companies specializing in the automotive industry. He is an expert in building KPI & data-driven sales- and marketing-organizations and can look back on many years of experience in data-driven marketing and e-commerce environments.
Sascha Kurth has been advising automobile manufacturers in a global context since 2013. He has in-depth expert knowledge in the areas of goal-oriented sales & marketing planning, data management platforms & customer data platforms, e-commerce platforms, programmatic advertising, customer relationship management, smart KPIs and management dashboards.
Before joining Berylls Mad Media, he supported leading OEMs, e-mobility start-ups and fast moving consumer goods manufacturers in their sales and marketing transformation for PricewaterhouseCoopers
Featured Insights
he Chinese government has backed EV development for two decades, and the country’s OEMs are making electric cars that consumers like. Can foreign carmakers keep up?
By every measure, China is the world’s most important car market – this year 29 million vehicles are expected to be sold in the country, compared with 21 million in the US and 20 million in the EU. China will further eclipse these two regions in the coming decade: by 2030, Berylls expects 38 million new vehicles to be registered annually in China, equivalent to 31% of the global market, compared with 20% and 18% market share in the EU and US respectively.
The country is also the world’s biggest xEV market, with around 3 million of what the Chinese government calls ‘new energy vehicles’ (NEVs including BEVs, PHEVs and FCVs) sold in 2021. Will it retain this leading position over the next decade, as European and US carbon emissions commitments drive the xEV transition in those regions?
At the UN Climate Change Conference (COP26) in Glasgow in 2021, China committed to the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement to limit global warming by 1.5 °C, and the country (the world’s biggest greenhouse gas emitter) has set a goal of being carbon neutral by 2060. Around 10% of China’s emissions come from the transport sector, and one of the key milestones en route to 2060 is the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)’s target for NEVs to account for 40% of all new vehicle sales by 2030.
In this viewpoint, we will look at China’s plans for decarbonizing road transport and the threat to foreign OEMs from China’s successful NEV makers, in light of the following market dynamics:
China has had a systematic NEV strategy for decades: the target of reaching 40% of new vehicle sales from NEVs by 2030 is not a hurried concession to the growing international pressure to address climate change. Even before the turn of the millennium, the country had a goal to become the world’s leading automotive nation, and new electric drivetrains were a potential route to overtaking established leading markets such as Germany and the US.
NEV development was first funded in the CCP’s tenth Five-Year Plan in 2001, and up to 2008 the focus was on developing pilot vehicles with electric drivetrains. From 2009 to 2016, NEVs were sold to the local market with significant government subsidies and purchase incentives.
Since 2017, subsidies have been much more strictly linked to technical specifications such as range. The current funding program will finish at the end of 2022 which would immediately result in shrinking sales number for NEVs. However, as has happened in the past, subsidies may be extended, with stricter requirements for eligible EVs. The NEV market is also supported by the “dual credit policy”, a form of carbon market, where OEMs have to meet quotas for NEV production. For the upcoming years we expect the government to further move away from generous subsidies of the past – in favor of even stricter regulations urging manufacturers to move towards e-mobility which will once again spur NEVs transformation in China.
China’s long-term NEV strategy has put it far ahead of Europe and the US. As one building block of this strategy the CCP ensured the availability of charging points, key for the success of the e-mobility transformation. Government programs have subsidized the building of public charging stations since 2014, and approximately 1 million have now been installed.
The provinces in China with the highest number of charging stations are currently Guangdong, Jiangsu and Beijing, all located in the highly developed costal area pinpointing the Achilles heel of the Chinese charging infrastructure – the unevenly distributed charging infrastructure across the country.
China has by far the largest network of EV charging infrastructure worldwide, with a ratio of 8 BEVs to one charging station. That compares with a ratio of 20:1 in the EU, and sets the global benchmark. Progress is not stopping – as Figure 1 shows, the number of public charging points is expected to increase by 23% a year to reach 6.18 million by 2030.
BEV production is also ramping up – today the segment accounts for around 5% of vehicle production, and plug-in hybrids (PHEVs) for another 3%. However, we expect BEV production to accelerate significantly, growing by 32% a year to reach 13 million vehicles annually in 2029 – the equivalent of 40% of all car production (Figure 2). By comparison, we expect the US to produce 4 million BEVs a year in 2029, or 36% of total production volume.
China’s long-term strategy for NEVs also means it has built up a world-leading advantage in the critical area of battery supply.
At present, about 80% of the world’s EV batteries are made in China, and OEMs worldwide are heavily dependent on exports from the country: around 70% of the battery cells needed for cars manufactured in Europe, for example, come from China. China’s CATL is now the global market leader in lithium-ion EV batteries, along with LG Energy Solution (South Korea) and Panasonic (Japan).
Today’s installed production capacity in China is about 650 GWh/year; we expect capacity to increase more than three-fold to 2,260 GWh by 2030, equivalent to a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 16.5%. We expect domestic the demand in 2029 to be around 1,300 GWh a year based on NEV production in China – still enough for Chinese suppliers to have plenty of capacity to export battery cells to foreign manufacturers.
China’s advantage is not only in battery cell manufacturing, but in the raw materials needed to produce them. The country is one of the largest lithium producers in the world, with around 50% market share, as of 2018. The country also controls 80% of the world’s cobalt refining industry and more than 50% of nickel supply.
However, to counteract the risk of having one country dominate raw material supplies and production to such a degree, foreign OEMs are urged to establish their own battery supply chains as quickly as possible, to reduce their reliance on Chinese producers (read our detailed insight about China’s role in the race for raw materials here).
Highlighting the scale of China’s battery cell production advantage in comparison with other large automotive markets, there are already several dozen „gigafactories“ for Li-ion cells in the country, whereas in the US there are just five. By the end of this decade, there will be more than 100 gigafactories in China, while in the US, 17 have been announced (Figure 3).
Local production of battery cells is a key advantage for Chinese OEMs, and a vital enabling factor in making the country a leading automotive nation – not only in terms of quantity, but also in terms of battery technology.
Customers in China seem to have fully embraced electrification. Our analysis of customer sentiment in the country showed almost no differences between the various powertrain types (Figure 4).
Reasons for this include the fact that a high proportion of driving happens in urban areas in China (compared to the US for example) and BEVs and PHEVs have a clear advantage in that environment. Other advantages are being able to drive NEVs on days when ICE vehicles are banned due to high pollution levels, and government subsidies for NEVs. An appealing range of NEVs in the lower price segments made by Chinese OEMs also firmly established BEVs and PHEVs in the Chinese volume market at an early stage.
The driving range of NEVs has a big impact when it comes to negative sentiment, particularly any difference between real daily range and available range as displayed in the vehicle. Range anxiety is still an important issue for China’s NEV customers. However, the growing number of charging stations in China means drivers are less concerned about being unable to charge when they need to, or during a long journey.
Chinese OEMs also know their customers: the NIO ES 6 performs significantly better in customer sentiment scores than a Tesla Model 3, for example, and a BYD Tang PHEV ranks significantly higher than a BMW 5 Series PHEV (Figure 5). The less positive customer view of foreign brands when it comes to NEVs is borne out by vehicle sales: Chinese NEV models are outperforming their German competitors, as we analyze in our report, Alarming signs on the horizon – why German OEMS must do better in China.
Driving performance and technical details are not as relevant to NEV customers in China as in other markets, whereas cars with a modern look, spacious interior and connectivity win positive ratings. As a consequence, German OEMs including Mercedes, Audi and Volkswagen cannot keep up with the sales numbers of local NEV start-ups such as Nio, Xpeng or Li Auto. These “techy” start-ups are well liked by customers and can build upon own unique strengths, resulting in fast growth (for more details, please see our latest study, Quo Vadis, China 2022 – Who is under the gun?).
China has vital first-mover advantages in battery cell production and NEV charging infrastructure, as well as NEV production whereby all of this is grounded on a forward-looking e-mobility strategy. Customers accept EV engine technology and China’s “techy” OEMs are producing what customers want when it comes to e-mobility.
The expected fall in ICE sales in China this decade indicates the future of the country’s auto market will be in NEVs. However, if China is serious about decarbonizing road transport, it will not stop to actively support the e-mobility transformation. We expect government incentives to be extended beyond 2022 to encourage greater NEV adoption, although future subsidies are likely to be smaller and with more requirements for the vehicles they apply to. A more intensive dual credit policy for OEMs, with higher quotas for NEV production, would also drive the market forward – and thereby strengthen local OEMs.
For all these reasons, Chinese OEMs have a strong advantage over foreign rivals in the NEV market. We expect them to use the momentum of the e-mobility transformation to build upon local industry capabilities in the volume and premium segment. So, to be successful in China in the long-term, foreign OEMs can’t rely on their previous success with ICE vehicles. They need to react fast to compete with China’s NEV start-ups, and work to win customer approval for their electric models.
Dr. Jan Burgard (1973) is CEO of Berylls Group, an international group of companies providing professional services to the automotive industry.
His responsibilities include accelerating the transformation of luxury and premium OEMs, with a particular focus on digitalization, big data, connectivity and artificial intelligence. Dr. Jan Burgard is also responsible for the implementation of digital products at Berylls and is a proven expert for the Chinese market.
Dr. Jan Burgard started his career at the investment bank MAN GROUP in New York. He developed a passion for the automotive industry during stopovers at an American consultancy and as manager at a German premium manufacturer.
In October 2011, he became a founding partners of Berylls Strategy Advisors. The top management consultancy was the origin of today’s Group and continues to be the professional nucleus of the Group.
After studying business administration and economics, he earned his doctorate with a thesis on virtual product development in the automotive industry.
Featured Insights
rucking is a sector that is hard to decarbonize, and its climate impact is significant: 40 percent of global road transport emissions come from trucking, according to the International Energy Agency.
Due to the much higher gross vehicle weight and annual mileage of trucks compared to cars, their carbon footprint per vehicle is 50 times higher.
Many fleet operators are eagerly waiting for the market introduction of zeroemission trucks, as they pursue net-zero carbon strategies. Moreover, with CO2 taxes rising, alternative powertrains also help reduce the total cost of ownership (TCO). Finally, increasing bans of Diesel trucks in urban areas make zeroemission vehicles a mere necessity.
While incumbent OEMs have been sluggish to introduce zero-emission trucks, investors are bullish about electrified commercial vehicles and funding for innovative startups is readily available. The successful launch of new entrants like Lightning eMotors and Lion Electric demonstrates this.
For a breakthrough of battery electric trucks, two things are crucial: sufficient range and charging speed to reach the required daily distances, as well as economic competitiveness to conventional trucks. In the end, vehicle operators will choose whichever vehicle fulfills their requirements and has the lowest TCO.
We have investigated the U.S. market regarding vehicle deployment, model availability, major players, applications, and technologies. Are battery electric trucks the universal solution for decarbonization of the trucking sector? Will
they do the job?
Steffen Stumpp (1970) joined the Berylls Group in October 2020 as Head of Business Unit Commercial Vehicles. At this point, he already looked back on extensive professional and leadership experience in the commercial vehicle industry. Stumpp started his career in an OEM and went through different roles in research, marketing, product planning and after-sales service. When he switched to the automotive supplier industry, he took over the responsibility for worldwide sales and marketing of a medium-sized tier 1 supplier. After another step as head of sales he decided to join Berylls, where he is now responsible for the commercial vehicle business.
Stumpp is a graduate engineer and has studied industrial engineering at the KIT in Karlsruhe and the Technical University of Berlin with focus on logistics.
Featured Insights
Russland führt Krieg gegen die Ukraine und schockiert damit seit Tagen die ganze Welt. Millionen von Schicksalen spielen sich tagtäglich vor Ort ab.
Durch den Krieg gibt es nicht nur humanitäre, sondern auch wirtschaftliche Folgen, die sich teilweise auf die ganze Welt auswirken. Neben dem Anstieg der Öl- und Gaspreise, dem Fall des Rubels und dem Auschluss einiger russischer Banken aus dem Zahlungssystem Swift, werden auch einige Fertigungen und Kooperationen zu Automobilherstellern auf Eis gelegt beziehungsweise sogar ganz beendet. Wie stark sich die Unternehmen dem entgegensetzten müssen, erklärt Dr. Jan Burgard, CEO der Berylls Group im Podcast mit Börse hören.
Quelle: Börse hören.
https://www.brn-ag.de/40124-Burgard-Berylls-Strategy-Advisors-Russland
Dr. Jan Burgard (1973) ist CEO der Berylls Group, einer internationalen und auf die Automobilitätsindustrie spezialisierten Unternehmensgruppe.
Sein Aufgabengebiet umfasst die Transformation von Luxus- und Premiumherstellern, mit besonderen Schwerpunkten auf Digitalisierung, Big Data, Start-ups, Connectivity und künstliche Intelligenz. Dr. Jan Burgard verantwortet bei Berylls außerdem die Umsetzung digitaler Produkte und ist ausgewiesener Spezialist für den Markt China.
Dr. Jan Burgard begann seine Karriere bei der Investmentbank MAN GROUP in New York. Die Leidenschaft für die Automobilitätsindustrie entwickelte er während Zwischenstopps bei einer amerikanischen Beratung und als Manager eines deutschen Premiumherstellers.
Im Oktober 2011 komplettierte er die Gründungspartner von Berylls Strategy Advisors. Die Top-Management-Beratung ist die Basis der heutigen Group und weiterhin der fachliche Nukleus aller Einheiten.
An das Studium der Betriebs- und Volkswirtschaftslehre, schloss sich die Promotion über virtuelle Produktentwicklung in der Automobilindustrie an.
Featured Insights
y some estimates, metaverse activity will generate more than $1 trillion in annual revenues. But why and how should carmakers get involved?
Facebook renaming itself Meta in late 2021 kickstarted a significant amount of hype and often misinformed discussion around the metaverse. Even the notion of a single metaverse is – at least for now – misleading. We define a metaverse as an open virtual world with 3D graphics, in which users can roam and interact with one another as well as the structures within it.
You are right. Metaverses are nothing new per se: gamers have long been used to meeting and interacting with virtual personas in online worlds. Second Life, arguably the first pure metaverse, serves as a warning – it was launched in 2003 but never gained mainstream traction. However, two decades on, accelerated by Covid-19, the virtual world is now far more closely intertwined with the real world, VR and AR hardware is more financially attainable. Even more dramatically, what has changed in recent months is that companies have had an epiphany regarding the commercial potential of these virtual spaces.
Global brands including Nike are making bets on the metaverse, where young consumers are already congregating. The sportswear giant is launching “Nikeland”, a virtual brand experience within the Roblox metaverse, which is frequented by an estimated two-thirds of tomorrows car buyers in the US. At the end of 2021, Every Realm, a metaverse investor, had purchased $4.3 million of virtual land. However, this could potentially be dwarfed by the estimated $1 trillion of revenue that analysts at Greyscale Investments, a digital currency asset manager, estimate may be created each year in metaverse spaces. Some $25bn will be spent on virtual luxury goods and collectibles alone by 2030, Morgan Stanley forecasts.
We believe it is now safe to say: the metaverse matters and this time it is different.
Investing in the metaverse is similar to investing in the early days of the internet – the risks are undeniable, but so is the scale of the potential opportunity. In our view, the car industry has even more to gain from embracing the metaverse than many other sectors.
OEMs have an opportunity to increase their toplines by selling virtual vehicles or merchandise, as well as by positioning their brands in the virtual spaces that the car buyers of today and tomorrow are actively flocking to.
There is also an opportunity to reduce costs by improving operations. The key benefit of using the metaverse as an operational play is the ability to accelerate the planning process, with increasing precision and efficiency. By using the data produced by a virtual twin to anticipate how production operations will work in reality, OEMs can plan, test and optimize production lines before and during a model’s production cycle.
This is not science fiction. OEMs have already begun moving into the metaverse pursuing different strategies: Hyundai and Cupra, for example, have created virtual brand experiences in the metaverse, displaying their visions of the future of mobility as well as their new vehicles. BMW has teamed up with Nvidia to create a virtual twin of its Regensburg factory on Nvidia’s Omniverse platform, to plan, test and optimize production operations.
Metaverse: BMW Virtual Twin Production Line
We have assessed OEMs’ metaverse activities to date and grouped them in the illustration below. The result shows that carmakers have seen the visual branding value in metaverses, ranging from Ferrari creating a virtual twin for car configurations, to the creation of proprietary metaverses to advertise new vehicles.
At the same time, a small group of innovators are setting themselves apart: like BMW, Hyundai is also building a “meta-factory” at the company’s innovation center in Singapore. The aim is to learn how to maximize the use of robots in production by virtualizing robot-controlled processes, using experts with VR headsets to operate the robots remotely.
Merging the real and the virtual, Audi is currently working on a hybrid in-car experience, combining the sensation of a moving vehicle with travelling through a virtual metaverse, experienced via a VR headset while sitting in the real car.
What is more, Chinese OEM IM Motors is developing a hybrid sales experience in which users can earn points redeemable for parts and accessories through their driving behaviors.
As more carmakers enter the space, waiting could be costly. What actions can OEMs take now to stay ahead of the wave?
First: win acceptance from top management. Agreed, metaverse as an abstract topic may be neglected and shunned on OEMs top floors. Bringing tangible examples of how other established companies including OEMs are engaging in the Metaverse can create the urgency to act.
Second: Decide on a metaverse strategy to pursue. Should the strategic focus be on branding, sales, operational improvements, hybrid virtual-real customer experiences, or a combination of these? A decision is needed here: OEMs risk losing touch with the generation of brand-obsessed, digital-native car buyers who have grown up living in virtual spaces. These customers expect to interact with their chosen brands in both the physical and virtual world.
Third: Decide on how to enter the metaverse. Depending on OEM endowment and willingness to engage, a decision must be made whether to invest in a footprint in an established metaverse or to rent a space within it. On the other side of the spectrum, OEMs may opt to build a proprietary metaverse capturing full freedom and influence over the virtual space.
Fourth: Decide which metaverse to enter. Community size, growth, composition, and engagement differ across metaverses. Making sure these parameters match with the metaverse strategy is key. What is more: Depending on the metaverse, just as with real-world real estate, the amount of virtual land in a specific metaverse can be capped, and plots that are close to users’ favored spots are the most sought after. This creates scarcity and drives virtual land values higher. Swift action is needed to pre-empt exploding virtual real estate prices.
Last: Decide on key partners. OEMs will likely not have the capabilities for a metaverse strategy in-house. Partnerships are key. Depending on the level of metaverse engagement, different types of partners should be considered. These may range from freelance designers, useful, for example, for the creation of brand experiences in existing metaverses, all the way to tech companies that may serve the OEM in its full spectrum metaverse strategy.
Investing in a footprint in the metaverse is a high-risk, high-reward opportunity. Done right, OEMs can secure the attention of future car buyers, position their brands as innovative and optimize their operations. We believe that, as with the internet itself, joining the metaverse is not a question of when, but if.
Stay tuned: In upcoming posts, we will lift the curtain and deep dive on selected OEM metaverse strategies.
Timo Kronen (1979) is partner at Berylls Group with focus on operations. He brings 17 years of industry and consulting experience in the automotive industry. His focus is on production, development and purchasing as well as supplier task forces. Some of his recent projects include:
Restructuring of the Procurement Function (German Sports Car OEM), Supplier Task Force for an Onboard Charger (German Premium OEM), Strategy Development for the Component Production (German Premium OEM)
Before joining Berylls, Timo Kronen worked at PwC Strategy&, Porsche Consulting Group and Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG. He holds a diploma degree in industrial engineering from the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT).
Featured Insights
Munich, March 2022
any CX improvements are planned and prototyped, but too often never make it to delivery. Berylls Mad Media’s four cornerstones enable carmakers to transform their customer experience.
As customer expectations for personalization and seamless cross-channel experiences continue to rise, there remains huge potential for optimizing customer interaction in the automotive industry.
For most companies, detailed customer insights are already to hand. Yet the mindset, capabilities, and infrastructure to use the data effectively for real-time decision-making are lacking. Corporate IT landscapes remain fragmented between business units and regions, inhibiting the optimization of customer journeys. Equally fragmented budget planning slows down innovation and incentivizes silo-thinking. Inconsistency between online and real-world touchpoints confuses customers and complicates customer journey development.
Yet it is possible to meet these challenges with a structured approach through all business units. We have identified four cornerstones that will enable OEMs to transform into organizations capable of providing a best-in-class customer experience (CX):
Journey execution framework
End-to-end data strategy
Centralized CX portfolio
Test and learn approach
#1 Journey execution framework
#2 End-to-end data strategy
#3 Centralized CX portfolio
#4 Test and learn approach
In our work with clients, we ensure that all organizational layers are enabled to work on common goals that establish industry-leading personalized customer experiences. This approach is underpinned by a harmonized technology infrastructure, an iterative approach to planning and KPI-driven touchpoint optimization.
Companies need to act today – because customer experience is the differentiator of tomorrow.
The methods and tools of CX are everywhere. Requests for proposals, design sprints and strategic war rooms are full of colored post-its, CX prototypes and designs, and demonstrations of journeys mapped. But the truth is that most CX initiatives don’t deliver. Most prototypes never make it to delivery, organizational priorities overrule customer needs, and journey maps end up doing little more than decorating the walls. The conclusion: companies need to address CX execution.
Issues to be tackled include:
Competing challenges such as rising customer expectations and intensifying competition result in fragmented and disconnected CX initiatives, wasting valuable resources and often undermining customer experience.
Focus on CX collides with commitment to follow-through. When change begins to hurt – when teams genuinely transform the way they work – organizations often falter and return to the familiar path of how things have always been done.
Deliverables in the form of prototypes are no longer enough: CX initiatives will be scrutinized more critically and CX managers will be asked to demonstrate a measurable contribution to both top-line and bottom-line growth.
The automotive industry is particularly vulnerable to CX failure. Disconnected organizational structures, outdated planning and budgeting processes, fragmented system and data infrastructures, and the lack of direct customer touchpoints constitute a highly explosive mixture.
Customer touchpoints can be digital, in the form of emails, app push notifications and website landing pages, or offline interactions, such as test drives. Often, OEMs are held back from engaging directly with customers through some of these touchpoints because dealers still control many of the interactions and thus the data, especially during the sales process.
Companies that do not optimize their CX development processes will struggle to achieve rapid innovation and digital experience execution, will experience disproportionally high development costs and fail to deliver connected experiences, and are unlikely to achieve personalization due to a fragmented supporting data and IT architecture.
These are the seeds of failure in any CX initiative. The existing toolbox used by customer experience teams does not contain solutions to the real problems out there. It must be scrutinized and refined. How? At Berylls Mad Media, we prioritize horizontal harmonization and vertical integration:
At a strategic level, companies must harmonize CX thinking to connect purpose with execution. They must connect customer journeys with employees and with the organization. Customer journey mapping needs to become the central source of truth for CX projects.
Three elements must drive the CX portfolio backlog: business and brand strategy, qualitative and quantitative insights, and technology-driven innovations. When organized this way, the CX portfolio owns a harmonized, cross-functional backlog that serves as a basis for roadmaps and agile implementation. This breaks up functional silos and helps to steer departments towards the same goals.
At a structural level, CX execution demands deep vertical integration. Front-end designs and click-dummies are only the first step. To evolve them into revenue-generating product features, all elements of an organization need to be involved: processes, organizational design and governance, enabling technologies and architecture blueprints, and an end-to-end data strategy, as well as external stakeholders. For this to work sustainably, it takes guiding principles, methods and frameworks that enable organizations to connect customer experiences directly with the corresponding value-creating delivery processes.
For OEMs, these two themes represent a fundamental transformation. Yet once CX becomes horizontally harmonized and vertically integrated, other challenges will be tackled more easily because integration enables OEMs to react more flexibly to customer needs, shorten time-to-market, outperform established competition, and go head-to-head with new competitors in areas including software and direct sales.
To deliver personalized customer experiences, OEMs need to know their customers and their journeys in the first place. Data may be the new gold – but many OEMs struggle to leverage the potential of their most precious customer data. Typically, they do not follow a clear and standardized data governance process, resulting in inefficient data management, and they lack organizational design and communication structures to connect, enhance and share insights. If data quality is poor or incomplete, the result will be uncertainty in planning marketing budgets and in projecting sales.
To maximize sales conversions and efficiently attribute campaigning efforts to the most successful touchpoints, it is crucial to first align on goals, objectives and KPIs. Once these are defined the required tracking infrastructure along the entire customer journey can be created, so that each touchpoint generates customer traffic and conversion insights, which in turn shapes marketing budget splits and touchpoint optimization measures.
Seamless customer journeys are hard to realize because touchpoints are often based on non-unified IT systems that cannot access the same data and that lack interfaces to provide truly personalized customer experiences. This is why enabling technologies are frequently optimized for single touchpoints. The result: national sales companies develop local solutions and define their individual local journeys, perpetuating highly fragmented system landscapes, data security inefficiencies and high maintenance costs.
Harmonization of this architecture can transform CX. Cross-functional teams rather than separated business and IT functions will help establish transparency, allowing accurate attribution of revenue growth and customer satisfaction to underlying technologies, and ultimately enabling continuous improvement, better customer focus and higher degrees of personalization.
This means that OEMs should bite the bullet and let go of legacy systems. Even if maintaining them seems cheaper than investments in modern platforms, they hinder the development of innovative solutions that cut long-term costs and improve CX targeting and business goal achievement.
Seamless customer journeys are hard to realize because touchpoints are often based on non-unified IT systems that cannot access the same data and that lack interfaces to provide truly personalized customer experiences. This is why enabling technologies are frequently optimized for single touchpoints. The result: national sales companies develop local solutions and define their individual local journeys, perpetuating highly fragmented system landscapes, data security inefficiencies and high maintenance costs.
Harmonization of this architecture can transform CX. Cross-functional teams rather than separated business and IT functions will help establish transparency, allowing accurate attribution of revenue growth and customer satisfaction to underlying technologies, and ultimately enabling continuous improvement, better customer focus and higher degrees of personalization.
This means that OEMs should bite the bullet and let go of legacy systems. Even if maintaining them seems cheaper than investments in modern platforms, they hinder the development of innovative solutions that cut long-term costs and improve CX targeting and business goal achievement.
Digital channels have made it easy to create customer touchpoints. Carmakers’ big marketing budgets make it easy to increase digital share of voice. Yet spending these budgets efficiently on touchpoints that encourage customers to convert is difficult. The rate at which new digital touchpoints are created exceeds the rate at which digital governance succeeds in aligning them.
This leaves OEMs trapped in a broken landscape of touchpoints that are not part of a centrally orchestrated customer journey. Typically, OEMs are not able to determine the success of specific touchpoints and whether to build upon or abandon them. More importantly, it leaves customers confused when they are confronted by information overload and touchpoint inconsistencies. Customers prefer logical sequences of touchpoints that build upon one another across channels with relevant information and relevant calls for action. Today’s customers have learned – mostly from industries other than automotive – to expect certain levels of consistency, transparency, and simplicity in communication. Some auto industry start-ups are confronting these challenges, but many incumbents are not.
Most OEMs plan their budgets long before they are utilized. By the end of the planning year, budgets are often set in stone, and some unused budgets transfer automatically to the following year or even two years. With this way of working, agility in the face of changing external and internal parameters is almost impossible.
Planning cycles of such length undermine making CX a high priority because no one can forecast exact customer needs in two years’ time, let alone the feature requirements that meet them.
OEMs are struggling to exit the budget trap due to rigid hierarchies and behaviors that incentivize self-optimization by single business functions. The delivery of a budgeted requirement counts as success, whether it improves CX or not. What is lacking is central direction capable of managing cross-functional backlogs, which should be the basis for planning. In a CX-focused organization, planning and delivery go hand-in-hand and are not governed by calendar years.
Most OEMs plan their budgets long before they are utilized. By the end of the planning year, budgets are often set in stone, and some unused budgets transfer automatically to the following year or even two years. With this way of working, agility in the face of changing external and internal parameters is almost impossible.
Planning cycles of such length undermine making CX a high priority because no one can forecast exact customer needs in two years’ time, let alone the feature requirements that meet them.
OEMs are struggling to exit the budget trap due to rigid hierarchies and behaviors that incentivize self-optimization by single business functions. The delivery of a budgeted requirement counts as success, whether it improves CX or not. What is lacking is central direction capable of managing cross-functional backlogs, which should be the basis for planning. In a CX-focused organization, planning and delivery go hand-in-hand and are not governed by calendar years.
Berylls Mad Media identifies four cornerstones that ensure CX focus from ideation to delivery and continuous optimization:
A journey execution framework to develop a central customer journey by standardizing data, systems and processes that build the foundation for personalization.
1. A journey execution framework to develop a central customer journey by standardizing data, systems and processes that build the foundation for personalization.
An end-to-end data strategy to track and analyze touchpoint performance across the customer journey.
2. An end-to-end data strategy to track and analyze touchpoint performance across the customer journey.
A centralized customer experience portfolio to ensure consistency across touchpoints and facilitate cross-domain prioritization and agile delivery of the product backlog.
3. A centralized customer experience portfolio to ensure consistency across touchpoints and facilitate cross-domain prioritization and agile delivery of the product backlog.
A test-and-learn approach to iteratively design touchpoints and gather high-frequency customer feedback to quickly validate or reject hypotheses.
4. A test-and-learn approach to iteratively design touchpoints and gather high-frequency customer feedback to quickly validate or reject hypotheses.
The journey execution framework (JEF) is a tool that integrates CX focus across organizational layers. It ensures that all teams – even those who have traditionally identified as backend functions – understand their impact on customer experience. The JEF consists of three interconnected levels:
Organizations need to understand the customer perspective. The JEF is centered around one target customer journey, an idealized process that illustrates how a customer moves from brand awareness, consideration, checkout, and purchase to ownership including aftersales and eventually repurchase.
• Even while customers seldom follow the exact target journey, the JEF sets important guidelines that facilitate product, marketing, and service decisions.
• The customer journey template provides OEMs with new levels of control over their customers’ experiences.
• The full target journey is broken down into use cases that can be put into operation, and each one becomes a micro journey with clear start and end points, that can be prioritized by their impact on purchase decisions.
Use cases can be put into operation with process charts that link touchpoints across online and offline channels, bounded by use case entry and exit points. Drafting effective use cases demands the involvement of experts – it is through collaborating with stakeholders that the charts show their true power as vehicles to drive discussions.
• The interaction blueprint for micro journeys offers a high level of control due to clear scoping and higher level of detail.
• The charts of sales-related use cases show how to loop users who abandoned the target journey back into the funnel.
• The interaction blueprint visualizes customers’ interactions with touchpoints and customer-facing services.
The architecture blueprint picks up where the interaction blueprint stops by mapping technology enablers to specific use cases. It serves as a key element for standardization by applying the architecture and data flow mapping approach to the use cases from the entire customer journey.
• Enabling technologies will be mapped to the interaction blueprint, including all relevant systems and data sources, with tech experts supporting this process.
• The blueprint across different micro journeys builds the foundation for and drives the overall IT target architecture.
• The resulting requirements flow into a central backlog that represents the basis for delivery. Critically, the backlog needs to be governed by a central body, authorized to manage crossfunctional requirements that historically were developed and delivered in functional silos.
Data must be a key source of truth that is consulted for every strategic decision. To achieve an overarching data strategy, a homogeneous data structure must be defined across information collected directly from customers, as well as third-party data (from data providers), and analytics data. From there, all the data must be collected and processed in a uniform system. Resources that are capable of processing and deriving insights must be established.
Homogeneous data management is the cornerstone that enables the individualized touchpoints along the customer journey. To implement this strategy, OEMs need to achieve the following:
#1 Establish a holistic customer view across all channels, linking marketing, sales and service.
#2 Create real-time triggers based on customer data to achieve meaningful customer interactions.
#3 Define personalized next-best actions and install next-best offers based on learnings from customer interactions.
#4 Standardize communication patterns to provide consistency across the customer experience.
Understand your customer based on direct and third-party insights.
Show relevant content at the right time on the preferred channel.
Fully automate cross-channel views of campaign performance for real-time decision-making.
Understand your customer based on direct and third-party insights.
Show relevant content at the right time on the preferred channel.
Fully automate cross-channel views of campaign performance for real-time decision-making.
An organization capable of end-to-end CX focus requires a centralized portfolio:
All elements of the JEF are designed at a central level. Touchpoint blueprints and the system infrastructure can be centrally developed and maintained, and deployed in markets.
Some elements, especially offline touchpoints and legal requirements, continue to call for local adaptations, but these adaptations should be closely aligned with central objectives.
Clear processes enable cross-domain prioritization and agile delivery of central portfolio backlogs.
Resource and budget allocation is based on the central backlog to break up departmental silos.
#1 Definition of only one central target customer journey, from which use cases and touchpoints are reverse-engineered. While the customer journey is broken down into use cases that consist of several touchpoints, all elements aim to realize that one target journey.
#2 All elements of the JEF are designed at a central level. Touchpoint blueprints and the system infrastructure can be centrally developed and maintained, and deployed in markets.
#3 Some elements, especially offline touchpoints and legal requirements, continue to call for local adaptations, but these adaptations should be closely aligned with central objectives.
#4 Clear processes enable cross-domain prioritization and agile delivery of central portfolio backlogs.
#5 Resource and budget allocation is based on the central backlog to break up departmental silos.
Visualize the entire CX to ensure a smooth customer journey.
Reduce duplication and realize synergies.
Quickly adapt the target customer journey and its micro journeys based on changing customer needs.
Visualize the entire CX to ensure a smooth customer journey.
Reduce duplication and realize synergies.
Quickly adapt the target customer journey and its micro journeys based on changing customer needs.
The key characteristic of companies capable of anticipating changing customer needs is flexibility. From fixed long-term plans and rigid lists of high-level requirements, OEMs need to move towards short cross-channel planning increments, based on prioritized and regularly refined backlogs. While the high-level customer journey serves as an overarching target, an agile mindset ensures sufficient flexibility to reach it.
All OEMs should follow these fundamental guidelines:
#1 Don’t start with a plan, start with hypotheses.
#2 Validate or reject hypotheses by quickly gathering customer feedback with minimum viable product (MVP) launches, customer surveys and user testing.
#3 Iterate based on feedback to meet your customers’ needs better, and then even better.
#4 Don’t consider delivery itself as a success, define success as the desired changes in customer behavior based on your delivery.
#5 Confront failure by generating learnings for real change in future iterations; beware of the sunk-cost fallacy that puts failure on repeat.
Berylls Mad Media helps clients transform into truly customer-centric organizations that focus on personalized customer experiences. We are a team of CX specialists who have successfully guided clients across industries with this challenging endeavor.
We ensure that CX doesn’t stop with a design sprint or prototype. We facilitate the development of target customer journeys, from which we reverse-engineer a consistent landscape of marketing and sales touchpoints, based on standardized technologies. We build the foundation for tracking real-life customer journey performance end-to-end with a holistic KPI framework. We support the formation of a centralized governance model that embraces shorter planning cycles, agile methodologies, and hypothesis-driven development.
We believe that CX requires entire organizations to collaboratively work towards common goals.
Copyright Berylls by AlixPartners
