Decision resource · 06 · Online edition

Service Terminal Business Case Template

A printable framework for dealership and corporate approval

Build approval around verified conditions, explicit assumptions, pilot evidence, and accountable owners.

AudienceService managers, fixed operations directors, general managers, corporate operations, finance, and procurement

Decision questionHow do I build a dealership technology business case?

Document length9 substantive sections

What this document covers

Service Terminal extends policy-controlled access to authorized existing workstation sessions into more useful service-department locations. It is workflow infrastructure and does not replace the DMS, OEM applications, diagnostic equipment, repair-order process, or dealership personnel.

Section 01

Executive request

Complete this page only after the operating condition and proposed scope have been verified by the named owners.

Requested decision: ______________________________________________________________

Business reason in one sentence: __________________________________________________

Decision owner: __________________________ Required decision date: _______________

Dealership name: _________________________ Location: _____________________________

State the access-dependent problem, not a generic transformation goal.
Name the requested pilot or deployment scope.
Identify exclusions and conditions of approval.
Attach evidence rather than substituting a projected outcome for a measured one.

Business-case summary

Area	Verified current condition	Proposed change	Decision evidence
Workflow	________________	________________	________________
People	________________	________________	________________
Technology	________________	________________	________________
Economics	________________	________________	________________

Section 02

Current operating condition

Describe how work moves today, where workstation access is located, and which repair-order transitions wait for that access.

Repair orders per day: __________ Operating days per month: __________

Technician count: __________ Advisor count: __________ Service bays: __________

Customer-pay labor rate: __________ Effective labor rate: __________

Observed access-related minutes per role or day: ________________________________

Name the observation dates and shifts.
Separate walking, waiting, relay, re-entry, and context switching.
Record unusual staffing, demand, parts, or system conditions.
Identify the source for every volume and labor figure.

Evidence attached

Workflow observation notes

Relevant timestamp or queue report

Floor-path or placement map

Employee and manager interviews

Assumption owner and update date

Section 03

Observed problem and affected workflow

Write the problem as a transition that can be observed. Avoid describing every departmental delay as a workstation issue.

Observed transition: ___________________________________________________________

Role that owns the next action: __________________________________________________

Current access point: ______________________ Proposed access point: ______________

Frequency: _________________________________ Observation source: _________________

Affected employees and locations: ______________________________________________

Map one affected sequence

TriggerVehicle, technician, advisor, parts, or OEM event

Current pathTravel, wait, relay, or resume pattern

System actionAuthorized workstation-dependent task

Return pathWork resumes or information is relayed

Business stateRepair order advances, waits, or reopens

Section 04

Proposed Service Terminal deployment

Define the minimum placement and technical scope that can test the stated problem.

Proposed terminal count: __________ Pilot dates: ________________________________

Physical locations: ____________________________________________________________

Authorized roles: __________________________ Approved targets: __________________

Technical owner: ___________________________ Service owner: ______________________

Orientation plan: ______________________________________________________________

Service Terminal will extend existing workstation sessions; existing business systems remain.
List normal and optional network paths separately.
Record trust mode, local-state handling, logging, support, and removal.
Do not expand target scope during the evidence period without recording a new phase.

Implementation plan

Gate	Acceptance evidence	Owner	Date
Architecture and network	________________	________________	________
Endpoint and certificate policy	________________	________________	________
Placement and safety	________________	________________	________
User orientation	________________	________________	________
Removal and state handling	________________	________________	________

Section 05

Expected operational effect

State the mechanism and the measure. A useful claim connects closer workstation access to a named transition without promising sold labor.

Expected mechanism: ____________________________________________________________

Primary measure: ____________________________ Baseline: ________________________

Secondary measure: __________________________ Baseline: ________________________

Success threshold: __________________________ Evidence owner: __________________

State whether the proposal targets direct workstation travel, finding-to-update latency, downstream response, late documentation, completed vehicles awaiting records, or another defined mechanism. Do not combine all effects into one savings percentage.

Outcome logic

Input	Immediate change	Observed workflow effect	Business interpretation
Terminal placement	Shorter access path	Fewer trips or minutes	Recovered operating time
Authorized session access	Less relay or re-entry	Shorter named transition	More workflow continuity
Adoption and reliability	Usable sessions	Actions completed near work	Repeatable capacity signal

Do not carry an expected effect into the financial model until its assumption and owner are stated.

Section 06

Financial model

Model time first, then apply a dealership-approved hourly value. The output is potential capacity value, not guaranteed revenue or profit.

Repair orders per day: __________ Seconds affected per repair order: __________

Operating days per month: __________ Selected labor value per hour: __________

Monthly investment input: __________ Input source and date: _____________________

Cognitive-load, accuracy, and cycle-time effects can strengthen the operating case, but they should remain unpriced unless the dealership defines a reproducible conversion. Available capacity is not recognized revenue or guaranteed accounting profit.

Assumption worksheet

Daily recovered hoursRO/day × seconds/RO ÷ 3,600

Monthly recovered hoursdaily recovered hours × operating days

Potential monthly capacity valuemonthly recovered hours × selected hourly value

Break-even seconds per ROmonthly investment × 3,600 ÷ operating days ÷ RO/day ÷ hourly value

Daily recovered hours____________

Monthly recovered hours____________

Potential capacity value____________

Break-even threshold____________ seconds

Label each value customer-provided, measured, modeled, or example.

Section 07

Pilot evidence

Summarize what happened during a bounded test and what else changed in the operating environment.

Baseline dates: ______________________________ Pilot dates: _______________________

Measured users and location: ____________________________________________________

Material exceptions: ___________________________________________________________

Employee feedback summary: _____________________________________________________

Pilot evidence table

Measure	Baseline	Pilot	Interpretation
Workstation-related trips	________	________	________________
Estimated walking minutes	________	________	________________
Named transition delay	________	________	________________
Terminal use	N/A	________	________________
Connection / support events	N/A	________	________________
Late-day backlog where measured	________	________	________________

Section 08

IT, security, and support status

Record decisions rather than asserting that a generic architecture is automatically acceptable in every dealership environment.

Technical review owner: _______________________ Status: ___________________________

Approved RDP targets and ports: __________________________________________________

Certificate / trust decision: ____________________________________________________

Local-state classification and handling: ________________________________________

Support, update, and log owner: __________________________________________________

Review record

Primary and compatibility connection behavior reviewed

Credential handling and username history reviewed

Local logs, network profiles, and optional device state reviewed

Redirection, audio, input, session termination, and network loss tested

Kiosk hardening, physical access, rollback, and disposal accepted

Section 09

Risks, mitigations, and approval record

A credible request names the condition that could prevent value or acceptance and assigns a concrete response.

Recommendation: approve / revise / extend pilot / decline

Conditions of approval: __________________________________________________________

Decision owner: _________________________________ Date: _________________________

Approver signatures or decision record: _________________________________________

Risk register

Risk	Likelihood / effect	Mitigation	Owner
Low adoption or poor placement	________	Observe and reposition	________
Network or target instability	________	Test and monitor	________
Control or certificate exception	________	Remediate before use	________
Modeled value not realized	________	Use pilot evidence	________
Local-state or disposal gap	________	Document lifecycle	________

This template provides printable fields. It does not create an AcroForm or constitute a completed dealership approval.

Common questions

Questions this document helps answer

Is this a completed financial recommendation?

No. It is a printable framework for dealership-provided facts, modeled assumptions, technical status, and an accountable decision.

Which labor value should be used?

Use the dealership's approved decision metric, label it precisely, and consider showing more than one scenario rather than treating a posted rate as realized value.

Why are the fields printable instead of interactive?

The reproducible Chromium build preserves reliable layout and selectable text; blank fields can be completed in print or in a controlled internal workflow.

Next action

Complete the template using verified dealership data

Use the evidence, worksheets, and decision questions in this document with verified dealership inputs and the appropriate operational and technical owners.

Return to the beginning Contact Service Terminal