The calibration problem facing collision repair is not rooted in unwillingness. It is rooted in complexity — at least, that is the central argument Adi Bathla, co-founder and CEO of Revv, puts forward.
"The root cause of this compliance gap isn't laziness," Adi Bathla told Collision Repair, speaking from the offices of the New York-based software company that develops AI-driven workflow, documentation and billing tools used by collision repair facilities to manage ADAS calibrations. "It's complexity."
Bathla's argument is grounded in Revv's recent research on the ADAS calibration maturity curve, which involved conducting a survey of more than 300 shops to illustrate a widening gap between demand and capability. About 61% of repairs now require calibration, yet fewer than half of shops are fully equipped to perform that work consistently, even as volumes are expected to grow by roughly 30% over the next two years.
Adi Bathla speaking to Collision Repair.
For Bathla, that gap begins with a fundamental shift in the vehicle itself. "Cars are becoming computers on wheels at a rapid pace," he says. "Based on the make, model and trim, there's a unique set of sensors, cameras, modules and electronics that power these systems. If you touch the bumper, fender or quarter panel when a car goes into repair, there's a ripple effect."
That ripple effect, he argues, is the core of the problem. A repair that appears straightforward can trigger multiple hidden calibration requirements across several systems, each governed by manufacturer-specific procedures. "It's a fundamental shift in the way cars are repaired," Bathla says. "A technician who has been repairing panels for decades is now expected to work with targets, lasers and software. It's closer to engineering."
The maturity curve data, in his view, shows the industry has not yet caught up. While 74% of shops report ADAS work as a growing revenue driver, execution remains inconsistent, with gaps in tooling, training and standardized processes.
The consequence, Bathla argues, is not just operational strain but missed work. "More than 20% of vehicles that need calibrations are leaving shops without them," he says. "That's not because the technician chose to skip it. It's because identifying the work itself is a research problem."
That research burden is central to his explanation. Technicians must interpret fragmented OEM documentation to determine what procedures are required, often without compensation for that time. "It takes hours, days and sometimes weeks of manual research to dig into manufacturer documentation to really understand what needs to be done," Bathla says. "And there's no physical damage to point to."
Even when shops follow standard diagnostic processes, he argues the problem remains. "When you do a pre-scan and post-scan, the scan tool will tell you the electronics are working completely fine," he says. "But a camera can be tilted by a millimetre and still pass that scan."
For Bathla, that example illustrates a broader point about hidden risk. "Now the car has been returned to the road, and it thinks it's in the wrong lane. It starts drifting left or right," he says. "That tilt cannot be detected by a pre-scan or post-scan. It can only be identified if you follow the manufacturer procedures."
Those procedures, he adds, are becoming more numerous and more complex, compounding the challenge. At the same time, Bathla argues the industry lacks a shared standard for how to respond.
"Right now the industry is operating in a gray area," he says. "Both sides of the equation are interpreting what the manufacturer is talking about."
That ambiguity, in his view, is what drives friction between repairers and insurers, particularly around whether calibrations are necessary and billable. "If clear standards are established, there's a clear fork in the road," he says. And with guidance in place, both sides will see that "this is the work that needs to be done, and this is the process to do it."
Bathla's argument is that standardization would align incentives across the ecosystem. "For repairers, there's peace of mind that the work they're doing will get paid for," he says. "For insurers, it reduces the back and forth. The time it takes to resolve a claim is a cost centre for them as well."
The maturity curve, he suggests, shows awareness is no longer the primary issue. Revv's data indicates 79% of shops now recognize the need to invest in ADAS operations. The challenge is execution at scale. "ADAS is becoming a fundamental part of every repair," Bathla says.
"The question isn’t whether the work is there anymore. It's whether the industry has the systems to identify it, perform it and prove that it was done."
