The Mistakes We Made Over the Years

The previous articles talked about our workshop, processes, after‑sales service, customer factory inspections, people, and order journeys. Reading through them, you might get the impression that everything at Longvictor New Electrical seems to be done well, with every step going smoothly.

In fact, that is not the case.

For any factory, starting from scratch and reaching where it is today cannot be smooth sailing all the way. We have also made mistakes, taken detours, and paid our tuition. Some of those mistakes were painful at the time, but it was precisely these mistakes that taught us how to do things right.

So in this article, we would like to have an honest conversation about the mistakes Longvictor New Electrical has made over the years and what we have learned from them. This is not to seek sympathy, but to let you know how we have gradually become what we are today, step by step.

First accident: Why was the outer shell of those cabinets rusted when they reached the customer?

That was Longvictor New Electrical’s first export order overseas, destined for a country in Southeast Asia. When the customer placed the order, we were thrilled, feeling that we had finally broken into the international market. Production, packaging, and shipping went smoothly.

When the cabinets arrived at the customer’s site, they sent us photos showing rust spots on the enclosure.

Our first reaction at the time was: impossible. Our enclosures are made of galvanized steel with powder coating, with a high level of rust protection. How could they rust?

Upon investigation, we found the issue was in the shipping process. The goods were transported by sea, and the vessel had spent over twenty days at sea. The temperature inside the container was high, humidity was high, and combined with the corrosive effects of salt spray from the ocean, the edges and screw holes of the enclosure did show signs of minor rust.

Our powder coating process itself was not the problem, but we had overlooked the variable of the “marine shipping environment.” The rust protection standards suitable for an inland factory are insufficient for sea transport.

After that incident, we took three steps: First, we upgraded the anti‑rust treatment for the enclosure, adding extra coating thickness to the edges and applying anti‑rust oil to the screw holes. Second, we added desiccants and waterproof film to the packaging to reduce moisture intrusion during transit. Third, for all exported products, we introduced a salt spray test simulating the marine shipping environment before they leave the factory.

Since then, we have never had another problem with enclosure rust. But we have never forgotten this lesson: whether a product is good depends not only on how it performs in the workshop, but also on how it performs on the journey.

The second failure: Why do customers say “I can’t understand your instruction manual”?

One year, we received an order from a European customer. The customer was satisfied with the product, and the installation went smoothly, but after acceptance, they raised one piece of feedback: the manual was difficult to understand.

Our manual at the time was a direct translation from Chinese to English. The translation itself was not wrong, but the problem was that the manual was written according to the habits of Chinese workers. Some of the terminology and some of the operating steps were simply not clear to European electricians.

For example, we wrote “insert the wiring harness into port A,” but the European electrician didn’t know which port was port A because the labels on the cabinet were in Chinese. Another example: we wrote “press the reset button for 3 seconds,” but the location of the reset button was not clearly marked in the diagram.

The customer said their electrician took over two hours to figure out how to do the wiring—a job that should have taken one hour ended up taking twice as long.

This incident made us realize: a manual is not something you translate; it’s something you design. You cannot simply translate a Chinese manual into English and expect foreign customers to understand it.

From then on, we redesigned our manuals. Each manual is now created with the standard that “a person who knows no Chinese whatsoever should be able to complete the installation independently just by using it.” We use clear illustrations and text, with every step accompanied by photos and annotations. For critical steps, we also record videos and generate QR codes printed in the manual, so that customers can scan them with their phones and watch.

Later, when that customer placed another order and received the new manual, they sent us an email specifically saying: “This manual is so much better.”

The Third Time the Truck Rolled Over: Why Were the Screws on That Batch of Goods Not Tightened?

This was a mistake discovered internally, not reported by a customer.

At the time, there was a batch of cabinets on the production line. After aging testing, a quality inspector found during a random check that one screw inside a cabinet had not been tightened to the specified torque value. The screw was loose but had not yet fallen out.

When we traced it back, we found that the operator had not been in good condition that day and had missed the torque check at that workstation. Meanwhile, the quality inspector for that process had also been called away to deal with something else and had not performed the re‑inspection in time.

The problem itself was minor—a loose screw that just needed tightening. But it exposed a management vulnerability: we relied too much on the “conscientiousness” of people, and people can make mistakes.

After that, we added a “poka‑yoke” measure at all critical workstations: after completing their work, the worker must scan a QR code at the station with a barcode scanner, and only then will the system record that the process is complete. If the worker misses a step or fails to enter the torque value into the system, the cabinet cannot proceed to the next process.

We use the system to manage people, rather than expecting people to never make mistakes. Since this change, there has never been another case of a screw not being properly tightened.

The Fourth Failure: Why Did the Customer’s Cabinet Suddenly Stop Working?

This is an after‑sales case. A long‑time customer had a cabinet that suddenly stopped working after two years of use. The customer was very anxious because that cabinet was connected to their critical equipment, and a power outage would cause losses.

Lao Zhou connected remotely and found that a capacitor on the BMS main board had failed. Replacing the main board would solve the problem. The issue was that the supplier for that batch of main boards had discontinued that model, and we had no spare parts in stock.

We searched through our warehouse and found an old board of the same model, removed it, repaired it, and sent it to the customer. They installed it, and the system returned to normal. The whole process took two weeks. Although the customer didn’t complain, we felt quite embarrassed. Two weeks was too long for the customer.

After that incident, we reorganized our spare parts strategy. Previously, we stocked spares based on “product model.” Now we stock based on “core components.” For wear‑and‑tear parts such as BMS main boards, displays, communication modules, relays, and fuses, regardless of the model, as long as they are still in production, we maintain a certain level of inventory. For models that have been discontinued, we give customers a one‑year advance warning and suggest that they purchase a batch of spare parts for backup.

This lesson taught us that after‑sales service is not about figuring out what to do when a problem occurs, but rather thinking ahead: “What will I do if a problem arises?”

The fifth incident: Why did the customer say “Your response time is too slow”?

This feedback came from a customer in the Middle East. He emailed us about an issue, and we replied the next day. He felt that was too slow.

We explained the time difference and that we needed time to analyze the problem, but the customer wasn’t interested in those reasons. The only thing he cared about was that his cabinet wasn’t working, and he needed someone to help him resolve it immediately.

After that incident, we adjusted our after‑sales response mechanism. Now, for all customer after‑sales requests, we guarantee a response within two hours during business hours. Outside of working hours, we arrange for after‑sales personnel in the corresponding time zones to be on standby based on the region. When a customer sends an email, the system automatically alerts the responsible person to ensure that no inquiry goes unanswered overnight.

This change was not difficult to implement, but the hard part was changing our mindset. Previously, we believed that “fast response” was not the most important thing—what mattered was “solving the problem.” But later we came to understand that from the customer’s perspective, a fast response is itself part of solving the problem. If you delay in replying, the customer doesn’t know whether you are paying attention or whether you will take action. That sense of uncertainty is often more anxiety‑inducing than the fault itself.

Final Note

Some of these mistakes cost us our reputation, some cost us money, and some nearly cost us customers. But every single time, we honestly acknowledged the mistake and then diligently made things right.

Some people ask us: by writing about these mistakes, aren’t you afraid that customers will hesitate to place orders?

Our view is this: if you see a manufacturer that claims to “never make mistakes,” that’s when you should be cautious. Because that’s impossible. A truly reliable manufacturer is not one that never makes mistakes, but one that knows how to improve after making mistakes and doesn’t repeat them.

Longvictor New Electrical has reached where it is today not because we are smarter than others, but because we stepped into pitfalls earlier than others and took the task of filling them more seriously. Those mistakes we made and the detours we took have all eventually become the standards and processes we have now.

If you come to Longvictor New Electrical and see those work instructions posted on the walls, those processes that can only be passed by scanning a code, that well‑stocked spare parts warehouse, and those after‑sales engineers still replying to messages at two in the morning—you can be sure that none of this came naturally. It was all gradually improved, bit by bit, after we made mistakes.

This is the growth story of Longvictor New Electrical. There haven’t been many moments of glory; it has been more about learning from mistakes and moving forward by absorbing lessons. But we believe that a manufacturer willing to speak openly about the mistakes they have made is at least worthy of a second look.