Driver Programs
Disincentive versus positive reinforcement…….
What’s more powerful?
What’s the correct balance?
In reviewing the 2010 NAFA Driver Training Program survey, I noted that the vast majority of programs (90%) include specific “consequences” for poor drivers…..consequences up to and including termination….but a much smaller percentage (21.1%) of programs include formal recognition for good drivers. AmeriFleet’s experience tells us there is power in a comprehensive vetting, management, initial and on-going driver training program that includes high performance standards and significant consequences for poor performance coupled with a robust good driver recognition and bonus initiative. Like most survey respondents, we measure success and rationalize program investments via key incident rate metrics such as incidents/million miles driven, percentage of preventable incidents and incident costs. In addition we consider insurance premium costs. This balanced approach to driver training and recognition has paid significant dividends for our clients and our partners and for us.
Our results?….. World class preventable incidents/million mile ratios, year over year reductions in preventable incidents (down another 23% this year) and the ability to provide increased levels of insurance coverage for our clients and partners without increased premium costs. In providing logistics services for major U.S and Canadian corporations, we understand our responsibility to protect the client’s physical assets as well as their brand image. Our program of comprehensive training, high performance standards, and prescribed consequences along with recognition and bonus incentives helps us meet that responsibility.
-John Norris
