An Existential Response to my 85% post.

Thanks to Corey – over on Facebook:

Very insightful JVH-I have often thought about the very nature of parking and why it translates into a negative response instead of a positive one. I think that it boils down to three concepts, all stemming from human behavior.

First, when dealing with automobiles, there is already a sense of entitlement and everything that comes associated with it.

Second, the auto can be thought of as an extension of ourselves, our personality, and our identity.

Third, parking equals revenue-which opens a Pandora’s box of issues dealing with financial accountability.

All three of these are deeply rooted and most operators and even clients, cannot (or will not) maintain the high levels of ethics and efficiency needed to improve the image of parking. Just my two cents worth…

Social Share Toolbar
Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to An Existential Response to my 85% post.

  1. BW says:

    I wish I had some of those customers that think 17% variance is good enough. I had to take one of our engineers years ago and go do an audit for large city that wanted their meter audits to match their coin counts. We were able to get the variance down to less than 1%, and still provide that checklist today. It takes using the software the way it’s supposed to be used, doing reconciliations, only testing coins in test mode, staying on top of inventory movements, busy work to say the least.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>