I can't tell you how many times I'm on a call with a shop owner and they say: "I'm drowning. I think I need to hire another tech." And 10 minutes later we realize: Another tech won't fix it. It'll magnify it. Here's what usually happens on those calls. Owner says: "We're booked out two weeks. Cars stacked up. I need another tech." I ask: "How often do your techs wait on approvals? Parts? Dispatch?" Long pause. "Honestly… a lot." "Cool. Then the problem isn't production. It's feeding production." Here's the hard truth nobody wants to hear: When cars are backed up, it's usually NOT because you need more production. It's because: → Work isn't approved fast enough → Parts aren't sourced fast enough → Jobs aren't dispatched fast enough → Tech questions don't get answered fast enough → Cars and keys aren't moved fast enough The real constraint is front-of-house throughput. Hiring a tech first often makes the problem worse—because you're adding horsepower to a system that can't feed it. Let me twist the knife a little more: Every minute a tech waits is a minute you paid for nothing. When techs stand around, owners blame techs… but the shop is usually choking them. Hiring another tech doesn't fix starvation. It just adds another mouth to feed. Your techs aren't the bottleneck. Your front counter is. THE 30-MINUTE BOTTLENECK AUDIT Stop guessing. Measure it for one day. Here's how: Step 1: For one full day, track every time a tech is stopped for a non-wrench reason: Waiting on parts Waiting on approvals Waiting on dispatch/next car Waiting on answers Keys/vehicle movement Step 2: Put a clipboard at the counter. Every time it happens: hash mark. Step 3: At close, answer: What stopped tech momentum most often? What one role or process change removes that stoppage? Step 4: Implement ONE change for 7 days, then re-tally. This isn't theory. This is data. Data kills drama. COPY THIS SCORECARD TECH STOPPAGE SCORECARD (1 day) Waiting on parts: ___

A reporter is working on a story about private equity ownership in the auto repair industry. She's looking for shop owners (or people who know shop owners) who have direct experience with PE - whether you've been acquired, considered selling to PE, or watched competitors get bought out. If that's you or someone you know, drop a comment or DM me. I can make the introduction.

Zappos does something most shop owners would call insane. During onboarding, they offer new employees up to $4,000 to walk away. No hard feelings. Just take the cash and leave. Their thinking? If someone takes the money, they were never committed anyway. Better to find out in week two than month six when they've poisoned your shop culture and you've wasted thousands on training. Here's what got me thinking... Most of you already have 90-day probationary periods. You're already doing the "trial" part. But what if you added a financial incentive for the uncommitted to self-select out? And there's another angle here that's unique to our industry: The toolbox. Some shops pay to move a tech's box in. What if you also committed to paying to move it out—no questions asked—if either party decides it's not a fit during that first 90 days? Think about it: A tech's toolbox can cost $500-$1,500 to move. That's real money. But what's the cost of a bad hire who sticks around because leaving feels too expensive? I genuinely don't know if this would work in our world. That's why I'm asking. Three questions for the group: 1. Would offering a "quit bonus" during probation attract better candidates (who see it as confidence) or worse ones (who see it as an easy payday)? 2. If you guaranteed to pay a tech's toolbox in AND out during the first 90 days, would that make you more attractive to committed A-players... or just make it easier for flakes to bounce? 3. What's the REAL cost of a wrong hire who stays too long versus one who leaves too soon? 👇Drop your take below. I want the honest answers, not the polite ones.

Last week I was on an onboarding call with a husband and wife team who've owned their shop since 2009. They started as a "one-man operation". He was the tech, the advisor, the janitor, the everything. She eventually came in to help. They grew from that one-bay shop to five bays, three techs, two general service guys, and a couple service advisors. They had a record year. They're investing in systems. They're working with a coach. They're doing all the right things. And they're stuck. Not stuck because of car count. Not stuck because of marketing. Not stuck because they don't know what they need to do. Stuck because they have a service advisor who's been there about two months… and he's on his phone constantly. He's not doing what he needs to do. He asked their OTHER service advisor to help him update his resume. He knows the writing is on the wall. They know they need to replace him. And they're paralyzed. Here's what she said: "I think you hit the nail on the head, and that's what the problem is. I mean, we just... I don't want to have that conversation." And him: "I don't like to micromanage. I'm easygoing. If you had talked to me 10 years ago, it'd be a totally different story. I mean, 10 years ago I was standing in the whole building by myself." They've grown. They've softened. They've built an amazing family culture they're proud of. And now they don't know how to have the hard conversation that protects that culture. Sound familiar? HERE'S WHERE MOST SHOP OWNERS GET STUCK They know WHAT needs to happen but they don't have the WORDS. They don't have a script that lets them be direct without being cruel. Firm without being a dictator. Honest without burning the relationship. So they wait. They hope things will change. They settle for a warm body because "at least they can answer the phone." And they leave money on the table with every ticket. This is exactly why I built Jason Thompson. Jason Thompson is a custom GPT trained on 7+ years of real conversations with service advisors. Not generic business advice. Not ChatGPT hallucinations about "synergy" and "leveraging opportunities."

I have to get something off my chest. Back in 2017, I was invited into a small conference room in Burbank, CA to speak to a group of shop owners about digital marketing. After the presentation, this generous group of shop owners invited me into their 20 group, showed me how this industry really works, and trusted me enough to hire my small company for digital marketing. A few months later after working directly with a half dozen shops from that group, I realized that marketing wasn't their real problem. They were drowning trying to find and keep technicians. So we tried things. Hundreds of things. Some worked. Most failed. But over years of testing, the Technician Find process got better and better. Here's what I know now: The process works. It's worked hundreds of times for hundreds of shops. But I still lose sleep when a shop we work with doesn't make a hire. I take it personally. It bothers me in a way that probably isn't healthy. And after thinking long and hard about whether to post this, I realized—what's this community even for if we're not being honest about what's working and what isn't? SO HERE'S WHAT REALLY PISSES ME OFF 👉Shops that hire us, then appoint a busy or disengaged manager to coordinate hiring. Someone who has a dozen priorities higher on their list than hiring. 👉Shops that hire a consultant, then don't return phone calls, emails or take our advice. 👉Shops that don't follow up on applications within 24 hours. 👉Shops that don't leave multiple messages when a candidate no-shows—then give up. 👉Shops that never ask for referrals from every single person they interview. SOME SHOPS ASK IF I OFFER GUARANTEES I tell them I'd love to. The problem? I don't know if they can hold up their end of the bargain. Here's the truth no one wants to say out loud: Hiring is a partnership, not a vending machine. We've worked with shops that roll up their sleeves and consistently hire within 2-3 weeks. It's like clockwork and it's beautiful to watch. We've also worked with shops that sit back, fold their arms, and wait for a unicorn to walk through the door.