PurposeThe purpose of this paper is threefold: first, to analyse the existing work of warranty risk management (WaRM); second, to develop a generic WaRM framework; and third, to design a generic taxonomy for warranty hazards from a warranty chain perspective.Design/methodology/approachTo understand the top warranty hazards, the authors designed a questionnaire, received 40 responses from the warranty decision makers (WDM) in the automotive industry in the UK and then analysed the responses.FindingsThe assembly process capability at suppliers is the top contributor to warranty incidents from the suppliers’ and original equipment manufacturers’ (OEMs’) viewpoints. The human error at different stages of the product lifecycle contributes to the occurrence of warranty incidents. The collaboration among parties, particularly, the accessibility to warranty-related data between parties (i.e. suppliers, OEM and dealers), is limited. Customers’ fraud contributes more to warranty costs than warranty services providers’ fraud. The top contributors to customer dissatisfaction relating to warranty are the warranty service time and service quality.Research limitations/implicationsThe questionnaires were used to collect data in the UK, which implies the research outcomes of this paper may only reflect the UK area.Practical implicationsThe WaRM framework and taxonomy proposed in this paper provide WDM with a holistic view to identifying the top contributors to warranty incidents. With them, the decision makers will be able to allocate the required fund and efforts more effectively.Originality/valueThis paper contributes to the literature by providing the first work of systematically analysing the top contributors to warranty incidents and costs and by providing a WaRM framework.
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management – Emerald Publishing
Published: Aug 5, 2019