Show Notes
Thanks to our Partner, NAPA Autotech Training and Pico Technology Watch Full Video Episode In this episode of Diagnosing the Aftermarket A to Z, Matt Fanslow uses a famous Michael Jordan quote, a heartbreaking Minnesota Vikings loss, and a rant from Jeff Compton of The Jaded Mechanic Podcast to dig into a big question: When did we get so impatient with young people—and what is it costing our industry? Matt reflects on how we treat new, entry-level mechanical and technical specialists in our shops, how “common sense” isn’t actually common, and why our own backgrounds make it easy to forget what it’s like to start from zero. He draws parallels between sports, restaurants, and auto repair, and makes the case that if we want to “grow our own,” we must build patience and structure into our businesses. Along the way, he talks about failure as a prerequisite for greatness—using Michael Jordan, Larry Bird, Muhammad Ali, and even win–loss records and batting averages to remind us that the “greats” failed a lot before anyone called them great. Highlights & Topics Covered Michael Jordan’s failure quote and what it really says about success A recent Vikings–Bears game: JJ McCarthy’s rough day, clutch fourth-quarter drive, and How special teams and defense actually lost the game The internet meltdown: instant calls to replace a young quarterback who’s essentially still a rookie A short video rant from Jeff Compton (The Jaded Mechanic Podcast) about having patience with young people The core question: When did we get so impatient—and were we always this way? Generational shifts in handling criticism, shame, and feedback Why “common sense” isn’t common: How background, upbringing, and exposure shape what feels obvious Growing up around farms, equipment, and shops vs. growing up with screens Homemakers, latchkey kids, and how changing family structures change what kids bring into the workplace The reality of today’s entry-level hire: No mechanical background Doesn’t know a hex from a Torx… yet The shop’s responsibility if you want to “grow your own”: Structuring the business to shoulder an apprentice who isn’t producing much at first Defining basic expectations (showing up, being on time, not repeating the same mistake endlessly) Skill decay and repetition: Lab scopes, training classes, and how fast proficiency fades without regular use How we criticize: sharp scalpel vs. rusty spoon; cutting people apart vs. building them up Remembering that apprentices didn’t choose their childhood or start point—but are choosing this career The sports angle on failure and greatness: Michael Jordan getting cut from his high school team Pat Riley’s quote about last shot vs. “save my life” shot (MJ vs. Larry Bird) Muhammad Ali’s losses, UFC careers, and the obsession with “perfect records” Baseball batting averages: greatness at 30% success A teaser for a future episode: how this profession can play a role in the “war on young men”
Key Takeaways Failure is part of greatness. The people we call “the greatest” in sports failed repeatedly. Expecting perfection from a first-year tech is delusional. Common sense is built, not born. What feels obvious to you probably came from years of exposure, mistakes, and stories you grew up around. Your apprentice didn’t get that same download. If you want to grow your own, structure for it. Shops that bring in entry-level mechanical/technical specialists need systems and expectations that allow for low productivity at first while they learn. Criticism should develop, not destroy. How you deliver feedback—tone, timing, and intent—matters just as much as the content. You can correct without crushing. Patience is a strategic advantage. In a world short on technicians, the shops that can be patient, teach well, and retain younger people will win long-term. Connect with Matt Have an episode idea, question, or feedback? 📧 Email: [email protected] 💬 Direct messages via Facebook are welcome and appreciated.
Thanks to our
More from Automotive Field Theory
Watch Full Video Episode What happens when a customer decides to take their business elsewhere? Do you make it easy for them to leave, or do you make sure they never want to come back? In this episode of Automotive Field Theory, Matt Fanslow shares a frustrating experience switching internet service providers at Riverside Automotive. What started as a fairly straightforward decision to upgrade the shop's internet and phone service turned into an unexpected lesson in customer relationships, business strategy, and understanding the game we're actually playing. Along the way, Matt discusses the challenges of building a reliable shop network, the importance of upload speeds for modern automotive training and communication, and how a properly designed network helped solve years of connectivity problems. But the bigger question isn't about internet service. It's about what happens when a business takes a customer's decision to leave personally. How do we respond when a customer decides our repair estimate is too expensive? What happens when they choose another shop? Are we preserving the possibility of a future relationship, or are we so focused on the immediate transaction that we destroy it? Drawing on game theory and the concept of infinite games, Matt explores why the way we handle these situations can have consequences far beyond a single repair order. Topics discussed: Why Riverside Automotive switched from cable internet to fiber Shop networking, Wi-Fi access points, and the value of reliable infrastructure How a routine service cancellation became a lesson in poor customer relations Why customer retention isn't always about discounts or lower prices Handling customers who choose a competing repair facility The difference between losing a transaction and losing a relationship How negative experiences influence word of mouth and future business Finite versus infinite games and why the distinction matters in business Why the same principles apply to employees who decide to leave
Watch Full Video Episode What does sexual health have to do with automotive repair? More than you might think. Margaret Light, licensed marriage and family therapist and certified sex therapist, returns to Automotive Field Theory for a conversation that begins with a simple question about chemical exposure in the workplace and develops into a much broader discussion about sexual health, relationships, misinformation, shame, and communication. Matt and Margaret explore how little many of us actually understand about our own bodies, how cultural expectations shape our understanding of sex, and how misinformation can create unnecessary conflict within relationships. They also discuss the relationship between physical and psychological health, differences in sexual desire between partners, the role of shame when our bodies or relationships change, and why sexual health deserves more thoughtful attention from both healthcare professionals and individuals. As the conversation unfolds, Matt brings his automotive diagnostic perspective to the discussion: Are we addressing underlying problems, or simply treating symptoms? And what happens when we approach complicated human problems with the same assumptions we've always had? Topics discussed include: Chemical exposure in automotive repair and potential implications for personal and sexual health The limitations of traditional sex education and the prevalence of misinformation Pelvic floor health and the importance of understanding our own anatomy Finding credible sexual health information and distinguishing evidence from cultural assumptions Why sexual health concerns often involve both physical and psychological factors Treating symptoms versus identifying underlying causes Differences in sexual desire and how couples navigate them Shame, aging, changing bodies, and expectations within relationships Cultural attitudes toward sexual entitlement and obligation Ethical non-monogamy, jealousy, and different relationship structures Redefining intimacy when physical abilities or circumstances change Developing the communication skills necessary to discuss difficult or uncomfortable subjects Leading with curiosity instead of assumptions, judgment, or defensiveness
Watch Full Video Episode Recorded live at ASTA 2026 in Raleigh, North Carolina, Matt Fanslow sits down with Tim Iezzi, Ira Waldman, and Chris Farley for a conversation about diagnostic training, module programming, and the realities of fixing cars. The group shares wrong turns, software headaches, and those uncomfortable moments when a vehicle drove into the bay but suddenly won’t start. They discuss why effective training includes the mistakes along with the successful repair, and why a repeatable diagnostic process matters more than an unusual case study. From frozen progress bars and constantly changing software to wiring diagrams and working in an icy parking lot, there’s plenty here that technicians will recognize. Topics discussed Teaching diagnostic process through real cases, including the steps that went wrong. No-start diagnosis and getting sidetracked by an assumed immobilizer problem. Power probes, testing mistakes, and understanding what your test actually proves. Programming anxiety, patience, and the temptation to interrupt a stalled-looking session. Changing OEM software, authentication requirements, and the challenge of keeping procedures current. Software conflicts, dedicated laptops, updates, and backup equipment. Printing and marking wiring diagrams to make complex circuits easier to follow. Preparing for mobile diagnostic calls and adapting to conditions outside the shop. Remote programming, internet latency, and connection reliability.
Watch Full Video Episode What if the same technology we blame for weakening mechanical aptitude could help rebuild it? In this episode of Automotive Field Theory, Matt considers whether YouTube, internet access, and large language models could help address the automotive industry’s skill gap. Younger generations may be less likely to grow up around parents, grandparents, or neighbors who routinely repair cars, appliances, and homes—but they now have immediate access to demonstrations, explanations, and step-by-step guidance. These tools can certainly become a crutch. Much like GPS can get someone to a destination without teaching them how to read a map, an instructional video or AI-generated procedure can help someone complete a task without necessarily understanding the underlying system. But that may not be the whole story. For someone without a mechanically inclined mentor, a YouTube video or AI assistant may provide the encouragement and initial guidance needed to attempt a repair. The result will not always be successful, and professional shops regularly see the aftermath of DIY repairs gone wrong. Still, taking something apart, getting stuck, finding additional information, asking for help, and eventually working through the problem can begin developing real mechanical aptitude. That raises an interesting possibility: some of the people who eventually enter the automotive profession may trace their interest not to holding a flashlight for a parent or grandparent, but to repairing their own vehicle with help from a screen. In this episode: How mechanical aptitude was traditionally developed Why fewer young people grow up around hands-on repair The similarity between diagnostic databases, AI, and GPS The difference between following instructions and understanding a system Why unsuccessful DIY repairs may still create useful experience The limits of translating personal repair experience into professional work How YouTube and AI could provide a new entry point into the trades Whether technology is eliminating mechanical aptitude—or cultivating it in a different way
Watch Full Video Episode Oscilloscopes are becoming more powerful, accessible, and common in repair shops—but choosing the right scope is only part of the equation. You also need to understand how your particular scope captures, stores, and displays its data. Matt Fanslow answers listener questions about automotive oscilloscopes, including the new eight-channel PicoScope, how many channels a shop actually needs, and whether beginners should start with an inexpensive scope or jump directly into a more capable platform. He also explains the distinctly different way Snap-on scopes handle their sample buffer, and why misunderstanding that behavior can cause a technician to lose the exact event they were trying to capture. Topics discussed include: What we currently know about Pico’s new eight-channel automotive scope How Pico BNC+ powers and automatically identifies compatible probes and transducers Why current probes, pressure sensors, and microphones are all transducers Where a single-channel AESwave uScope remains extremely useful Why two channels are helpful but a four-channel scope should now be considered a shop necessity When five, six, or eight channels become valuable Using crankshaft, camshaft, ignition, and other signals together Why the Snap-on Vantage Pro remains an excellent and affordable starting point Whether a PicoScope is really too advanced for a first-time scope user How modern scope hardware can compensate for less-than-perfect setup choices Why capable modern scopes resemble modern supercars: approachable in ordinary use, with substantial performance available when needed Why oscilloscopes of this caliber should generally be considered shop equipment How Snap-on scope screens differ from the displays used by many other scopes Understanding the Snap-on screen as a window into a continuously moving buffer Why Snap-on scopes allow technicians to zoom out after a capture—but not zoom in Setting the time base correctly when looking for details such as injector pintle movement How a captured event can disappear from the buffer even though the display appears frozen When to save a screenshot instead of relying only on the scope-data file The difference between Snap-on’s Graphing Meter and Lab Scope modes Common setup mistakes made by Snap-on scope users The practical limitations of older Snap-on sample rates and memory configurations How descriptive filenames make saved waveforms far easier to find years later What vehicle, engine, system, signal, and operating-condition information should accompany a saved waveform?