You don’t have to wait long for another major car brand to announce a recall of one of its models for safety reasons. These notices appear to happen with such frequency that you might conclude there is some form of contagion at work within the car world.
There is statistical evidence to suggest that instances of recalls have increased over time and, conversely, that we are also more aware of their existence than ever before because of the amplifying nature of our digital world, with recall notices getting trafficked and commented upon on social media, as well as being reported in traditional media. Both things can be true, especially now that manufacturers operate in an era where quality and customer experience have become so important.
The idea of a “Friday car” – the derogatory term that was once used to describe what customers believed were defective cars built in haste as workers rushed out of factories for the start of the weekend – is a relic from the less automated past.
It is also true, however, that we are living in a peak recall era, with more problems being identified on what are, in theory at least, cars manufactured to a higher standard than ever before.
In January, Tesla made global headlines over the recall of more than 1.6 million vehicles in China to fix automatic driver assistance steering and door latch controls. The same manufacturer recalled multiple vehicles in the US last year.
One recent advertising notice published in The National requested the recall of about 2,000 Honda cars registered in the UAE because of “improper manufacturing of stamped metal parts inside the front seat belt buckle”.
Last year, Ford’s Territory SUV was recalled in small quantities in the UAE for inspection of the welding between the steering column bracket and the cross car beam. In 2022, General Motors recalled 6,000 SUVs in this country to check the fitting of seat belts in the third row of seats. More than 1,000 Jeep SUVs were ordered back to UAE dealers to check the marque’s emergency alert system.
The list could go on and almost every manufacturer is likely to recall at least some of its vehicles.
Naturally, the news of the major Tesla recalls will have travelled farther than some others because of the number of owners they affected, as well as other contributory factors, such as the high-profile nature of the firm’s CEO, Elon Musk.
Similarly, people are likely to remember historic large-scale recalls by Ford and Toyota from decades ago because they involved so many vehicles and that recalls were not perceived as being commonplace in years gone by.
Customer reactions to present-day recalls tend to exhibit a range of emotions from a shrug of the shoulders to outright indignation, with owners seeking to make sense of such an intervention by using it to confirm their own biases about a brand, for better or worse.
Recalls are, inevitably, a source of hassle, triggering an often-unwanted trip to the dealer.
Some customers will also worry about the potential damage that these recalls may have on market perceptions or resale values. Investors will speculate about what a mass recall will do to that manufacturer’s share price. Negative sentiments tend to be quick to coalesce around a brand, even though recalls are unlikely to have an instant financial cost to the customer.
There is another way of looking at this issue, however.
The existence of a widespread recall culture in the car industry may be positive, demonstrating that in-country regulatory frameworks are strong and that car makers are more willing to address failure and defects than previously, even if a lot of that process may be driven by compliance rather than curiosity.
Now consider the recent convulsions experienced in the aviation industry by Boeing.
The company has been accused of overlooking safety concerns after two fatal 737 Max crashes. This week its outgoing CEO, Dave Calhoun, apologised for the organisation’s failures at a US Senate hearing that was described as a “moment of reckoning” for the firm and its broader culture. Relatives of the deceased are demanding Boeing is fined billions of dollars.
The aviation sector’s historical approach to accidents, as well as its regulatory use of black boxes – whereby every problem is analysed and faults scrutinised and eradicated – has traditionally been the envy of other industries. This approach combined high levels of oversight with a culture of learning and improvement.
Boeing’s recent problems, compounded by the admission of the Federal Aviation Authority that it was too “hands-off” in the aftermath of the emergency on-board the Alaska Airlines Boeing 737 Max 9 flight earlier this year, show how the certainties of the past can be swiftly unwound.
When viewed in that context, although many will fret about a recall notice for their car, the fact that it has been triggered may indicate greater transparency within the industry and a broader willingness to tackle defects in the interests of safety. The alternative is to sweep problems under the carpet, and no one would advocate that as decent policy prescription.
Some customers will also ignore recall notices or wait for months until the next scheduled trip to the dealer. Compliance is painful at times, but is necessary, too.
