OEM leaders benchmarked how to get real value from returned parts—smarter selection, faster analysis, and stronger supplier accountability. The inaugural Parts & Quality Analysis Xchange session explored turning returns from a cost center into strategic quality intelligence.
Benchmarking the Real Cost—and Value—of Parts Returns
The inaugural Parts Return & Quality Analysis Xchange Group meetup brought together OEM leaders responsible for warranty operations, quality engineering, supplier accountability, and failure analysis to benchmark one of the most operationally complex areas of aftersales: parts return and root cause analysis.
Facilitated by Daryl Kreskowiak, former Manager of Supplier Warranty Cost Recovery at Stellantis, the discussion focused on the full lifecycle of returned parts—from selection and logistics to analysis and supplier response. As one participant captured it early in the session:
“We created this huge process to get parts back. Now the real question is—are we actually getting analysis value from everything we return?”
Across the conversation, three themes consistently emerged: smarter parts selection, stronger process discipline, and clearer supplier accountability.
Smarter Parts Selection and Retention
Participants described a hybrid approach to determine which parts should be returned for analysis. Attribute-based triggers—including part number, production period, or VIN ranges—automatically flag parts tied to quality concerns. Manual intervention remains essential when engineering or warranty teams identify claims requiring deeper investigation.
For new product launches, many organizations take a broader approach. Early-life failures trigger a “wide net” strategy, returning a larger percentage of parts to accelerate root cause identification and protect the launch phase.
A best practice shared: line-specific return requests. Instead of requiring dealers to return every component associated with a multi-item repair claim, some OEMs request only the parts needed for analysis—reducing dealer burden and unnecessary shipping costs while capturing meaningful failure data.
System integration improvements are also helping: one OEM described automatically triggering core credits for dealers when parts are returned for analysis, eliminating extra administrative steps. Others are working toward similar levels of workflow integration, turning returns into a more strategic, value-driven process.
Operational Discipline and KPIs
Once parts are returned, timely analysis is critical. Operational discipline separates high-performing programs from those struggling with backlog or inefficiency. Metrics discussed include:
- Days in bin, typically targeted at fewer than 30 days
- Time from binning to analysis start
- Overall throughput across the workflow
- Cycle time from claim submission to shipping (one OEM targets 12 days)
Without these metrics, organizations risk accumulating large inventories of unexamined parts—returns that are effectively zero-value expenses.
Supplier Accountability and Governance
Supplier engagement is essential for generating actionable insights. Several organizations described systems connecting suppliers directly into warranty and failure analysis workflows. For example:
- Supplier failure modes integrated into the OEM’s warranty platform allow suppliers to review claims, contribute analysis, and track corrective actions
- Structured response windows (often 20 days) and automated reminders help ensure timely participation
- Failure to respond can trigger No Supplier Response (NSR) designations, affecting performance scorecards or warranty cost allocation
- SLAs formalize expectations for acknowledgment, root cause analysis, and report delivery
These governance models not only ensure that returned parts do more than generate reports, but also drive corrective action and measurable quality improvement.
Turning Returns Into Strategic Quality Intelligence
Across the industry, the discussion highlighted a broader shift: parts return programs are evolving from logistics-heavy processes into strategic quality intelligence capabilities. The organizations extracting the most value focus on:
- Selecting the right parts for return rather than increasing volume
- Establishing operational KPIs to ensure timely analysis and throughput
- Creating governance models that drive supplier accountability and corrective action
Continuing the Conversation: May 19 Meetup
The Parts & Quality Analysis Xchange Group is part of MAPconnected’s peer benchmarking forums, helping OEM leaders collaborate on critical warranty and aftersales challenges.
Next session:
Defining A Robust Parts Analysis Process & Logistics Cost Control | May 19 | 11–12:15 PM ET | Virtual
Topics will include:
- Ownership and escalation models
- Defining OEM and supplier responsibilities in part return analysis
- Linking parts analysis to engineering, manufacturing, and warranty corrective actions
- Validating corrective actions and improving first-time fix rates
- Benchmarking logistics, shipping costs, and regional trade-offs
- Advanced analysis approaches for complex assemblies (engines, electrified systems, software-enabled modules)
Don’t wait for recap following the event—reserve your spot today to join live and continue benchmarking how peers turn parts returns into measurable quality intelligence.
🔗 https://www.mapconnected.com/event/parts-return-strategy-cost-optimization-xchange-group-2/
Learn more about what MAPconnected membership unlocks.
Subscribe to MAPconnected’s weekly newsletter to stay informed on upcoming peer sessions, benchmarking topics, and the industry signals service and warranty leaders are tracking inside MAPconnected.