911爆料

EV test drives are supposed to boost adoption鈥攂ut they can backfire

Body

One of the biggest obstacles to wider adoption of electric vehicles (EV) is completely invisible and unquantifiable. It鈥檚 the belief in many consumers鈥 minds that the range restrictions of EV make it a bad option for them. Doubts about mobility, whether or not they are well-founded, can run neck-and-neck with curiosity in the minds of consumers, keeping them from making the switch from ICE (internal combustion engine) to EV.

Hang Ren, professor in the information systems and operations management. Photo provided

These doubts are beyond the remedial reach of automakers and sustainability-minded policymakers. Within the EV ecosystem, auto dealerships are the ones most directly responsible for allaying buyers鈥 concerns. Newly published research by and , professors in the information systems and operations management area at Costello College of Business at 911爆料, focuses on one of the main levers at the dealers鈥 disposal: extended test drives. Bellos and Ren鈥檚 paper in was co-authored by Vishal Agrawal of Georgetown University.

Test drives have become a standard addition to the EV dealer鈥檚 toolkit. For example, BMW's Extended Test Drive Program lets customers use an EV for several days, and Volvo's Test Drive+ lends cars for up to four days. In some cases, government-sponsored initiatives such as (a partnership with the U.S. Department of Energy) have worked at the local level to facilitate test drives intended to educate consumers about EV. 

鈥淎 car鈥檚 advertised range is public, but the range a driver actually gets depends on personal habits and conditions they can only learn through hands-on experience鈥攚hich is why dealer demonstrations like extended test drives matter,鈥 say Bellos and Ren. In other words, test drives can prevent range-based doubts from overtaking curiosity. Indeed, if consumers are pleasantly surprised by their experience with the EV, they can leave doubt in the dust, as they zoom ahead all the way to an accomplished sale.

But it can also work the opposite way, as the researchers found using a game-theoretic model of plausible buying conditions. Included in the model were buyers with a range of mobility needs. In the hypothetical scenario, consumers鈥 natural (pre-test drive) inclination was to favor EV if their needs were high, since high-needs drivers spend more on fuel and EV is gas-free. As in real life, however, even these simulated consumers would not purchase an EV if their overall impression was unfavorable.

Ioannis Bellos, professor in the information systems and operations management. Photo provided

鈥淥ffering demonstration service does not always mean that you鈥檒l be convincing the customer to switch to EV,鈥 Bellos says. 鈥淎s a matter of fact, it may do the opposite鈥攊f the test drive convinces the customer that the achievable range is not enough to meet their need.鈥

The reseachers鈥 model shows that as EV technology begins to mature, becoming cheaper to produce and thus more profitable, the dealer鈥檚 incentive is to offer as many extended test drives as possible to boost sales. But once production costs fall below a certain threshold, the profit potential of EV becomes so high that dealers would be wise not to risk turning a percentage of customers away (or toward conventional ICE vehicles) by offering test drives.

In addition to implications for dealer profits, this dynamic has environmental significance. 鈥淚f we consider two customers鈥攐ne who takes a test drive and decides EV is not a good fit, and another who is convinced to purchase an EV after a test drive鈥攖he net effect on adoption is zero. They cancel each other out,鈥 says Ren. 鈥淵et the net emissions can increase, because that first customer probably drives more鈥攖hat鈥檚 the reason they were interested in EV in the first place.鈥

Test drives, then, can be net-negative for the planet to the extent that they deter heavy-use drivers from switching to EV by resolving their range-based doubts.

The researchers also found that test drives can negate the impact of tightening CAFE standards from the U.S. Department of Transportation, which set mandated fuel-economy levels for all automakers. One result of CAFE standards is to encourage production of more fuel-efficient EV as opposed to ICE vehicles. CAFE does not apply to dealers, however. As higher fuel-economy standards pressure automakers to raise wholesale prices for ICE vehicles, the expected switch from ICE to EV is inhibited by the unfavorable impression left in some consumers鈥 minds by the test drive. The researchers found this can flip the policy's intended effect: Without test drives, tougher CAFE standards reliably push EV adoption up, but once dealers offer test drives, a strict-enough standard can actually leave adoption lower than it would otherwise be.

Bellos and Ren conclude that 鈥渄ealer demonstration is a powerful but double-edged lever that must be deployed strategically.鈥 The environmental and financial benefits of try-before-you-buy are likely tied to the EV market鈥檚 growing pains, and may diminish as it matures.