Swift remedial action could be the stitch that saves nine.

Larger organisations can compare fleet costs between depots or regions, to see, for instance, how sales force ‘A’ measures up against sales force ‘B’, or how service engineers in the southern area perform in relation to colleagues in the north.

This raises one of the great skills of benchmarking, the ability to standardise your results in order to take account of different circumstances.

You wouldn’t, for example, expect parity between the costs of running a fleet of vehicles driven by service engineers in London to match those of colleagues working in the Scottish Highlands.

“By having discussions with data to hand you can allow for differences – benchmarking allows you to understand the differences,” says Dr Will Murray, research director of Interactive Driving Systems.

This is important for finance directors to understand when presented with information that suggests their own fleet’s performance lags behind the best in class. Only genuine like-for-like comparisons are valid.

“You need to benchmark comparable fleets and comparable activities,” says Chris Douglas, director of Transport and Travel Research.

“If there is too great a divergence the fleets may not be comparable.”

The second type of benchmarking involves supplying your fleet data to an external third party, who crunches the numbers and makes the comparisons made with other fleets, albeit under a cloak of confidentiality.

The reports should identify your company’s performance in relation to fleets with a similar profile, so that you can see how you measure up to both industry average and best practice.

You may know which other organisations are involved in the survey, but a degree of anonymity means you won’t be able to identify how any individual participant has fared.

And thirdly, there are some fleets that meet face-to-face behind closed doors, prepared to share data and discuss solutions with other fleets that operate in similar environments.

Chatham House rules typically apply, namely that what’s discussed in the room stays in the room, but the shared analysis of common problems can drive solutions.

This also offers the opportunity to compare fleet policies, processes and procedures in an immediate fashion.

All three types of benchmarking require the selection of key performance indicators (KPIs) so that fleet operators devote the time and effort in data collection and analysis to areas that will yield the highest rewards.

“The process is not just about data collection and comparison, but also a full implementation of solutions,” says Douglas.

So which are the most important areas of fleet expenditure to benchmark? Consultants contacted for this investigation rapidly settled on four: fuel spend; service, maintenance and repair costs; vehicle availability; and fleet accident numbers and cost.

Significantly, Douglas added that in any comparative study it’s unlikely for any fleet to be top of all the KPIs. The important element is the progress you make in your own fleet efficiency.

Tackle driver accident rate

Disclosing corporate accident rates is often fraught with anxiety. Yet with corporate and social responsibility high on the public agenda, minimising fleet risk is a duty none can ignore.

Areas to compile data for benchmarking include your overall accident rate (per driver, per vehicle and per mile); the number and cost of incidents involving vehicle damage; accidents involving personal injury; and fatalities.

But sometimes benchmarking isn’t just about data and figures. The Fleet Safety Benchmarking programme, for instance, lets you carry out a quick, free of charge, Gap Analysis Review of your fleet safety policies, procedures and processes and, anonymously benchmark your results with other organisations.

For more, visit www.fleetsafetybenchmarking.net“Even if you can only make incremental improvements of a few per cent across a few KPIs, that can have a huge impact,” he says.