DecisioQ New Car Dealership Developer Integration Manual

How software developers should incorporate DecisioQ into dealership software systems

This manual explains how to embed DecisioQ decision intelligence into new car dealership software platforms, including DMS, CRM, inventory, sales desk, finance and insurance, service lane, OEM program, and management reporting systems.

Contents

1. Purpose and Scope

2. Where DecisioQ Fits in a Dealership Architecture

3. Recommended Integration Pattern

4. New Car Dealership Decision Templates

5. Data Model Mapping

6. API Workflow

7. Implementation Examples

8. Workflow-Specific Guidance

9. User Interface Design

10. Security, Privacy, and Compliance

11. Performance and Reliability

12. Testing Strategy

13. Deployment Checklist

14. Recommended Rollout Plan

15. Appendix: Example Template Catalog

1. Purpose and Scope

New car dealerships make high-value decisions every day across sales, inventory, trade-ins, financing, OEM programs, service operations, staffing, and customer retention. Many of these decisions are currently handled through static rules, spreadsheets, manager judgment, or isolated vendor systems. DecisioQ should be incorporated as a decision orchestration layer that receives dealership data, evaluates weighted criteria, ranks available alternatives, and returns an auditable recommendation to the host application.

This guide is intentionally written for developers. It describes where DecisioQ belongs in a dealership software architecture, how to map dealership data into decision templates, how to call the DecisioQ API, and how to display results inside user-facing dealership workflows.

2. Where DecisioQ Fits in a Dealership Architecture

DecisioQ should not replace the DMS, CRM, inventory system, or F&I platform. It should sit beside those systems as a decision service. The host system keeps ownership of records, transactions, accounting, and compliance documents. DecisioQ evaluates the decision and returns a recommendation, ranked alternatives, scores, and rationale.

Customer / Lead / Vehicle Event
        |
CRM / DMS / Inventory / F&I / Service System
        |
Data Mapping and Criteria Builder
        |
DecisioQ API
        |
Ranked recommendation + scores + rationale + audit ID
        |
Dealership user interface and downstream transaction system

3. Recommended Integration Pattern

1. Define a dealership decision template in DecisioQ for each recurring decision, such as lead routing, inventory pricing, trade appraisal, deal approval, lender selection, or service appointment prioritization.
2. Map source-system fields into template criteria. Keep the mapping layer outside the UI so criteria can be reused across web, mobile, and batch workflows.
3. Invoke DecisioQ synchronously for interactive decisions and asynchronously for large batch decisions such as daily inventory repricing or aged-stock reviews.
4. Display the recommendation, score, and reason codes in the dealership application so users understand why an option is ranked first.
5. Persist the DecisioQ audit ID with the dealership transaction record for future reporting, governance, and process improvement.

4. New Car Dealership Decision Templates

5. Data Model Mapping

The DecisioQ integration layer should translate dealership records into neutral decision inputs. Avoid sending unnecessary personally identifiable information. Send only the fields required to evaluate the decision. Store a correlation ID that links the DecisioQ audit record back to the source transaction in the DMS or CRM.

6. API Workflow

A typical dealership integration uses a template identifier, a correlation ID, criteria, alternatives, and optional metadata. The API should return ranked results with score, rationale, and an audit identifier.

POST /api/decision/evaluate
Authorization: Bearer {access_token}
Content-Type: application/json

{
  "templateCode": "NEW_CAR_DEALERSHIP_LEAD_ROUTING",
  "alternatives": [
    { "id": "salesperson-101", "name": "Salesperson A" },
    { "id": "bdc-204", "name": "BDC Agent B" },
    { "id": "fleet-301", "name": "Fleet Specialist" }
  ],
  "criteria": [
    { "name": "Response availability", "weight": 30, "values": { "salesperson-101": 88, "bdc-204": 95, "fleet-301": 72 } },
    { "name": "Vehicle expertise", "weight": 25, "values": { "salesperson-101": 80, "bdc-204": 65, "fleet-301": 96 } },
    { "name": "Prior customer relationship", "weight": 20, "values": { "salesperson-101": 100, "bdc-204": 45, "fleet-301": 40 } },
    { "name": "Workload balance", "weight": 25, "values": { "salesperson-101": 60, "bdc-204": 92, "fleet-301": 78 } }
  ],
  "context": {
    "correlationId": "optional",
    "attributes": {}
  }
}
{
  "auditId": "dq-audit-20260625-000731",
  "recommendedAlternativeId": "bdc-204",
  "results": [
    { "alternativeId": "bdc-204", "rank": 1, "score": 78.85, "rationale": "Best response availability and workload balance." },
    { "alternativeId": "salesperson-101", "rank": 2, "score": 78.00, "rationale": "Strong relationship but lower availability." },
    { "alternativeId": "fleet-301", "rank": 3, "score": 71.60, "rationale": "Best fleet expertise but lower fit for this lead." }
  ]
}

7. Implementation Examples

7.1 C# Service Wrapper

public sealed class DecisioQDecisionClient
{
    private readonly HttpClient _httpClient;

    public DecisioQDecisionClient(HttpClient httpClient)
    {
        _httpClient = httpClient;
    }

    public async Task<DecisionResult> EvaluateAsync(DecisionRequest request, CancellationToken ct)
    {
        using var response = await _httpClient.PostAsJsonAsync("/api/decision/evaluate", request, ct);
        response.EnsureSuccessStatusCode();
        return await response.Content.ReadFromJsonAsync<DecisionResult>(cancellationToken: ct)
               ?? throw new InvalidOperationException("DecisioQ returned an empty response.");
    }
}

7.2 JavaScript / TypeScript Call

export async function evaluateDealershipDecision(request, accessToken) {
  const response = await fetch('/api/decision/evaluate', {
    method: 'POST',
    headers: {
      'Authorization': `Bearer ${accessToken}`,
      'Content-Type': 'application/json'
    },
    body: JSON.stringify(request)
  });

  if (!response.ok) {
    throw new Error(`DecisioQ evaluation failed: ${response.status}`);
  }

  return await response.json();
}

8. Workflow-Specific Guidance

8.1 Lead Routing and BDC Follow-Up

Use DecisioQ when a lead enters the CRM, when a customer re-engages, or when a lead remains untouched beyond an SLA threshold. The decision should consider salesperson availability, vehicle expertise, language preference, customer history, lead source quality, and workload balancing. The CRM should display the recommended assignee and the top reason codes before assignment.

8.2 Inventory Allocation and Stocking

Use DecisioQ during OEM allocation review, dealer trade evaluation, stocking strategy, and aged inventory review. Inventory decisions should weigh local market demand, model mix, floorplan cost, incentive support, days supply, color/trim desirability, and gross objectives. Batch processing is recommended for daily or weekly inventory optimization.

8.3 Sales Desk and Deal Approval

Use DecisioQ to evaluate whether a deal should be approved, restructured, escalated, or declined. Criteria may include front-end gross, back-end opportunity, customer payment objective, trade equity, lender approval probability, OEM incentive eligibility, and manager policy. The sales desk should always allow authorized managers to override the recommendation while capturing the override reason.

8.4 Trade Appraisal

Use DecisioQ to compare whether a trade should be retailed, wholesaled, auctioned, reconditioned, or declined. Criteria should include recon cost, mileage, book value, local demand, condition, brand fit, aged inventory risk, and estimated time to sell. Store the decision audit ID with the appraisal record.

8.5 F&I and Lender Selection

Use DecisioQ to rank lender paths and F&I product opportunities. Keep lender compliance rules in the F&I or lending platform; use DecisioQ to rank options based on eligibility, approval probability, customer fit, term, vehicle type, profitability, and disclosure requirements. Never use DecisioQ to bypass legal or lender-mandated requirements.

8.6 Service Lane and Ownership Retention

Use DecisioQ to prioritize service appointments, loaner allocation, warranty review, maintenance package offers, and customer retention workflows. Criteria may include customer lifetime value, warranty status, vehicle age, mileage, technician capacity, parts availability, and urgency.

9. User Interface Design

• Show the recommended option, ranking score, and the top three reason codes directly inside the existing dealership workflow.
• Do not force users to leave the DMS, CRM, or desking screen to understand the decision.
• Provide an override button for authorized users and require a structured override reason.
• Separate operational recommendations from legal disclosures, finance contracts, and OEM compliance statements.
• Use confidence labels such as Strong, Moderate, or Review Required, but keep the numeric score visible for managers.

10. Security, Privacy, and Compliance

11. Performance and Reliability

Interactive dealership workflows should target low-latency responses. Batch workflows such as inventory repricing, allocation review, or lead re-scoring can run asynchronously through a queue.

12. Testing Strategy

1. Create fixture data for common dealership scenarios: internet lead, showroom lead, aged unit, high-demand unit, negative-equity trade, service retention customer, and OEM incentive edge case.
2. Unit test the mapping layer so every source-system field maps to the correct DecisioQ criterion.
3. Integration test API failures, slow responses, invalid templates, missing criteria, and duplicate correlation IDs.
4. Run manager acceptance tests using real dealership scenarios and compare recommendations against policy expectations.
5. Perform regression tests whenever decision template weights or criteria definitions change.

13. Deployment Checklist

• Templates approved by dealership leadership and department managers.
• Authentication configured for each environment: development, staging, and production.
• Criteria mapping documented and version-controlled.
• Fallback behavior defined for every user-facing workflow.
• Audit ID persisted in the source system.
• Override permissions and reporting enabled.
• Monitoring dashboards configured for API errors, latency, volume, and decision distribution.

14. Recommended Rollout Plan

15. Appendix: Example Template Catalog