OEM leaders benchmarked how program structure—risk ownership, obligor models, and governance—directly impacts customer experience, dealer trust, and profitability. The Financial Products & Insurance Xchange Group is now building a framework to compare models and identify what’s actually working.
“Are your programs designed with intention—or did the structure just happen over time?”
The first meetup of the Financial Products & Insurance Xchange Group made one thing clear early: most organizations are deep in execution, but far fewer have stepped back to evaluate whether their program structure is actually intentional.
“We’re not able to really get out of the weeds… managing claims, dealer issues, and metrics… to really think about the bigger picture—who owns the risk, how the program is structured, and whether it’s actually designed with intention.”
That framing set the tone for a session focused less on day-to-day operations and more on the structural decisions that shape long-term outcomes.
A Cross-Industry Perspective
The group brought together leaders from agriculture, industrial equipment, powersports, manufacturing, and consumer products, with roles spanning warranty, risk, finance, and product service at organizations including AGCO, Mitsubishi Logisnext, Gibson, Polaris, and Cummins.
From IT transformations to ground-up warranty builds to global risk management structures, the range of experience created immediate value. Participants weren’t just sharing tactics, they were comparing fundamentally different approaches to program design.
“The decisions you make on risk and structure don’t stay internal—they show up in customer experience.”
As the discussion moved into obligor models, third-party structures, and insurance strategies, one theme stood out: structural decisions are not neutral.
“If you’re aiming to provide the best customer experience, a third party may not be the right decision… dealers still remember bad claim experiences years later—even after you’ve changed models.”
Choices around risk ownership, claims control, and program governance directly influence dealer trust, customer satisfaction, and brand perception, often long after the decision is made.
From Structure to Strategy
The group explored key structural considerations, including:
• Manufacturer vs. dealer obligor models
• Use of third-party administrators and insurers
• Captive and self-insurance strategies
• Regional differences in extended warranty adoption
• Governance models that align decisions across functions
Emerging topics like AI also surfaced as areas of high interest but limited clarity. While many organizations are experimenting, few have a defined roadmap for applying AI within warranty and financial product programs.
Building a Benchmarking Framework
To move beyond discussion, the group introduced a structured maturity framework to guide self-assessment and comparison across participants.
This framework, introduced with input from Jimmy Bynum of Garde Solutions, is intended to help the group:
• Establish a baseline for program structure and performance
• Identify strengths and gaps across organizations
• Enable anonymized benchmarking across key dimensions
• Support the development of executive-ready insights by October
The goal is practical benchmarking; something comparable and usable, not theoretical.
What’s Next: April Session
Session 2 | April 14 | Virtual
Topic: Product Performance, Penetration & Profitability
The next session will build on the structural foundation and move into performance benchmarking, including:
• Attach rates and penetration
• Margin and lifecycle profitability
• Portfolio mix strategies
• Alignment between risk models and financial outcomes
Participants will bring early inputs from the maturity framework, giving the group a more grounded, data-informed starting point for discussion. Several members are also exploring the possibility of a collaborative pilot with select distribution partners to test new approaches to improving extended service contract attachment and measuring the impact in a controlled, real-world environment.
A Different Kind of Conversation
By design, this is not a one-time discussion. It’s a multi-session benchmarking initiative aimed at producing meaningful outputs by the October Summit—without crossing confidentiality lines.
The objective is to:
• Identify structural archetypes
• Compare approaches to risk, capital, and dealer alignment
• Surface what’s working—and what needs to change
• Equip each participant with insights they can take back and apply inside their organization
It’s not too late to join the group; the work is just getting started.
If you’re responsible for financial products, risk, or warranty strategy and want to benchmark with peers, this is where those conversations are happening.
Leadership Xchange Groups are now active across six focus areas:
Parts Return & Quality Analysis | Warranty Administration | Recall, Customer Campaigns & Legal | TAC | Financial Products & Insurance | Purchasing & Supplier Cost Sharing
Peer benchmarking. Member-driven agendas. Real operational insight.