Repairability starts with thoughtful design. Take the Fairphone 5 for example. Its battery can be removed in just four steps, thanks to a back panel secured with clips instead of glue, a pin-based battery connector instead of a cable, and a tab on the battery that makes it easy to pry out with your fingernail.
But repairable design is only the start. Without the right support structures in place, even the most well-designed device might never get fixed. What good is a replaceable battery or screen if you can’t get a new one installed, or install it yourself?
For a device to be truly repairable, it must be supported with a comprehensive repair ecosystem. And with the Right to Repair becoming the standard through legislation and consumer demand, companies who want to stand out in repairability must either build that ecosystem or get left behind.
Repair Makes Cents
Supporting repair isn’t just the right thing to do. It makes good business sense.
Leading original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) like Google, HMD, Logitech, HP, and Lenovo are already creating robust repair ecosystems. That means they’re ready to comply with Right to Repair laws and attract consumers who want repair options beyond mail-in support.
Each of the five manufacturers listed above support some combination of in-house, authorized, independent, and self-service repair. Some OEMs support every option. For example, to repair a Pixel phone, you can take it to one of the seven physical Google Store locations, mail it in, go to an authorized service provider, visit an independent repair shop, or even fix it yourself.
But there’s not one right way to create and sustain a repair ecosystem. Ultimately it comes down to doing whatever works best to support and encourage your user base. However, there are some things any OEM should consider as they work to make truly repairable devices.
Different Repair Channels, Different Benefits
The choice of repair channels depends on many factors. How many customers do you have? How easily can a customer fix your product themselves? Where do your customers live? How critical is your product to customers’ daily lives? What do your customers expect?
What can you, as the OEM, implement effectively? (Because let’s be honest, a crummy repair experience can be worse than none at all.)
At the end of the day, how you choose to support repair depends on your individual context and business model. Here are some factors to consider when making this choice.
In-house repair services
Offering repair services directly is the best way to retain full control over devices and repair processes. (Though in-house repair is certainly not the only way to get quality repairs.) This can also be the simplest option in terms of parts supply chains because OEMs only need to worry about getting parts to their own locations.
Consumers have peace of mind in knowing that the people who made their device, and know it best, are in charge of repairing it. Often, devices repaired in-house also retain their manufacturer warranty. (But warranties can be complicated, and there are some common misunderstandings about how repair impacts warranties. There’s more on that later.)
However, in-house repair does have some drawbacks. For OEMs, the overhead costs can be high. They must train technicians and maintain repair centers without the advantage of scale in being able to fix devices from other brands. They’re limited to fixing the OEM’s own products. This usually means higher prices for consumers than other options.
In-house repair services are also often inconvenient for consumers. Manufacturers tend to have few physical locations that customers can visit for repair, so they must either go out of their way to get to a store or else part with their device for days for mail-in service. A few days or weeks without some things might not be that bad, but for critical devices like smartphones, it can be a dealbreaker.
But a word of warning: Providing only in-house repair services can cause manufacturers to run afoul of Right to Repair laws, which require OEMs to provide documentation and parts on fair and reasonable terms to anyone who wants them.
Authorized service providers (ASPs)
Authorized service providers allow manufacturers to outsource their repair work while still maintaining some control over the repair process. ASPs operate under the authority of OEMs, who provide tools, parts, documentation, and training. This can be more cost-effective as ASPs can work with multiple OEMs and therefore repair more devices. Consumers can also take comfort in knowing that the service provider is directly supported by the OEM.
Using ASPs can also give OEMs greater reach. By partnering with existing repair centers, OEMs can widen their geographic footprint at a lower cost than creating their own centers. This gives consumers more options for walk-in repairs while maintaining the perception of quality.
Another benefit for consumers is that many manufacturers keep a warranty fully intact for devices repaired by ASPs. (Though in the US, the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act means manufacturers must honor warranties after any successful repair, even in the case of third-party or DIY repair.) And, if something goes wrong during the repair, the ASP or manufacturer should have a plan in place to get the customer a functioning device at no additional cost.
One drawback to using ASPs is that customers still need to either make an appointment and travel somewhere or send their device off for service. In some places, options to visit ASPs in-person can be just as limited as visiting an OEM’s storefront.
Also, ASPs have financial arrangements with the OEM that could include recurring payments in exchange for authorization, credit lines, or minimum volume agreements. They may also have additional requirements related to marketing or operations. All of these have the potential to increase costs for consumers.
Independent service providers (ISPs)
Independent service providers are not formally authorized to conduct repairs, and usually are not directly supported by the OEM in any way, but they are an important part of a repair ecosystem. ISPs can provide in-person services in more places than ASPs or in-house repair while still giving the same standard of service, as long as the OEM makes documentation, parts, and tools available.
The biggest benefit of ISPs to both OEMs and consumers is their cost. Since they don’t require anything from the OEM besides repair documentation and spare parts, they have very low overhead costs for OEMs. (And, if the OEM is already making documentation and parts available to ASPs, there may be no additional overhead.) For consumers, since ISPs have no financial or other obligations to OEMs, their services are usually priced lower.
Even though ISPs provide greater geographic coverage, they may still be inconvenient for people to visit. Furthermore, this greater accessibility and lower cost comes with lower peace of mind for consumers since these shops are not trained by or accountable to the OEM. However, despite this perception, ISPs are usually able to provide repairs of the same or higher quality you’d get in-house or through an ASP. And, since they aren’t bound by agreements with the OEM, they may be able to use innovative techniques to make the repair better or cheaper.
For in-warranty devices, there’s another catch. Damage caused by a repair from an ISP will typically void the manufacturer’s warranty. While it’s illegal to void a warranty for a successful repair, no matter how that repair is achieved, if the OEM can show that a particular repair led to the fault in a warranty claim, they can deny the claim.
Self-repair
Self-repair is the frontier of repair support. This is where OEMs are differentiating themselves, like HP has done with the ReviveKit. While many companies have nailed down in-house, ASP, and ISP support, OEMs are starting to compete on self-repair services with innovations to match.
This channel of repair can have the lowest overhead cost for OEMs and be the most convenient (and cost-effective) option for consumers. Self-repair can also save time for customer service teams who don’t need to coordinate repairs and can instead direct customers to self-repair resources.
For OEMs, enabling self-repair means making parts, tools, and documentation available to anyone who wants them. Competing on self-repair means making the repair process straightforward and safe, the documents clear and effective, and the option of self-repair obvious and appealing.
Repairing their own devices builds a sense of loyalty in customers as they come to see their devices as durable and long-lasting, a good value. That means OEMs enjoy a customer base that not only wants to buy from them in the future, but also want to tell their friends. Customers who feel empowered to fix their own stuff will be connected to the brand in a powerful, meaningful way.
Properly supported self-repairs are also convenient for consumers. They don’t need to travel to service centers or part with their device, not even for a few hours. Instead, they can fix their own things in the comfort of their own home just for the cost of parts and tools.
One drawback of self-repair is the requisite technical skill and, more commonly, “fixophobia.” With the right tools and instructions, people can fix a lot of things. But they’re often too scared to try. What if they break it even more? What about warranties? This can be mitigated by positive messaging and intentional investment in self-repair support, but it should be addressed explicitly.
One major benefit of enabling self-repair is that doing so unlocks all of the other support channels. If an OEM starts by making a robust self-repair ecosystem, they can easily support in-house, ASP, and ISP repair options.
Finally, self-repair democratizes repair. It’s the most accessible and affordable way to give a reliable repair option. It’s also in demand from consumers, and while there are some risks with self-repair, they’re not as big as they might seem.
What about the warranty?
First, a big-picture question: How much support do OEMs need to provide for out-of-warranty devices? Well, it depends. In the EU, OEMs are obliged to provide repairs for their devices “within a reasonable time and for a reasonable price,” which can include devices outside of their warranty period. In the US, California’s Right to Repair law requires manufacturers to stock parts and tools and maintain updated repair documentation for seven years for devices costing more than $100, regardless of the warranty terms.
OEMs often choose to offer in-house or ASP options for in-warranty repair. This allows the OEM to collect data on the nature of the fault and ensure the repair is covered by the warranty. Offering in-warranty repairs in these ways also makes it easier for an OEM to offer a replacement if the device can’t be repaired.
But these options can be inconvenient for the consumer, who may prefer to go to an ISP or do the repair themselves. Does this void the warranty? The short answer: no. Consumers have the right to open their device and fix it, using whatever parts they want, without voiding the warranty. However, it’s important to keep in mind that if a repair damages a device, OEMs can deny warranty claims for that particular damage. Claims for other damage, though, unrelated to the repair, are still valid.
Out-of-warranty repair support offers a simpler picture. For most consumers, it really just comes down to cost, both of money and time. Most consumers will only choose to repair their device if the total cost of repair is around 25% of the cost of buying a new device. They also want repairs to be timely—for smartphones, people are willing to wait just over 4 days on average for a repair.
So, effectively supporting out-of-warranty repair usually means enabling repair through ISPs or self-service. These options offer the lowest costs and wait times of all available options, and are therefore most likely to keep customers satisfied.
What’s right for you?
There are four main ways to offer repair support: in-house, ASPs, ISPs, and self-repair. Each option has advantages and disadvantages, but they can work together to create the robust and comprehensive repair ecosystem that customers (and legislators) demand.
The best and simplest advice is to start by enabling self-repair. If you can create a repair support system that follows the 13 principles in the Gold Standard of Repair, you’ll be well on the way to ensuring legal compliance and providing options for all kinds of repair support, from in-house to independent.
As you consider expanding from self-repair, here are some important questions to ask:
- What customer needs aren’t being met by self-repair? Can they be met through ISP, ASP, or in-house repair?
- How much would it cost, both in money and time, to enable and support each additional repair channel?
- What is the most cost-effective way to balance overhead cost, ongoing costs, in-house labor requirements, customer reach, and customer convenience?
Fine-tuning a repair ecosystem will take some trial and error, and sometimes it can be hard to sell the value of a repair ecosystem to internal stakeholders. Any effort to enable repair should be tied to KPIs, and the value must be consistently communicated across departments. For example, enabling self-repair could have a positive impact on these metrics:
- Net promoter score
- Number of warranty claims
- Revenue from part sales
- Customer service time spent on repair-related issues
- Media sentiment score
- Environmental and sustainability goals
If you’re ready to jump in, but don’t know where to start, or want personalized guidance, our manufacturer solutions team is ready to help.
crwdns2944067:00crwdne2944067:0