Getting the best out of your operations control - part 1

"You can’t motivate people, but you can create an environment that encourages them to be motivated." In his article Getting the Best Out of People in the Workplace, Les Landes covers a number of key areas to achieve that goal. What applies to the workplace in general, surely applies to operations control.

This first post about 'getting the best out of your operations control' addresses the operations control processes. Les Landers points out that "if people don’t have clearly defined processes for the tasks that they’re expected to do, they are likely to struggle with how to carry out the tasks." What follows is how a high-level model for an integrated operations control. Such a model should apply for each process being monitored and steered, whether the airport can manage the process directly or not.

Let us take an example of the passenger flow, specifically passenger screening. Flight schedule, resource allocation, capacity information and standard processing times can be used to predict expected passengers and expected waiting times. In the best case, booked passenger numbers are available from the airlines (split by transfer and local passengers). During the day, planned information is automatically and dynamically updated with status changes, such as cancellations, delays, passenger number changes, gate changes, etc. which make the predictions more valuable. Automatically triggered warnings alert coordinators in operations control about potential bottlenecks (e.g. expected waiting times even with all lines open). Pro-active actions can be taken like delaying gate information to passengers and changing the gate. An actual waiting time at a passenger screening, automatically detected or manually reported, will trigger an alert and associated action. Such an action can be, obviously, to open more lines. Another action, maybe not that obvious, would be to first provide a list of flights which are currently being processed at security screening and which maybe become critical to complete boarding in time. Then, passengers of that flight can be directly addressed at the screening point. The analysis and reporting does not only cater for statistics. It should also analyse how well the prediction was, in order to adjust the algorithm. And provide feedback to planning and scheduling.

Now apply the same approach and technology to other processes.

Let's see what will be in part 2 of the series on how to get the best out your operations control. Maybe about Constructive Accountability?

Reduce start-up delays (IR 89)

Delayed flights which take away slots of punctual flights have a snowball effect. The other flights will be delayed with an IR 89 which stands - in such a case - for a start-up delay.

What if the causer would take the full effect which means that delayed flights can only depart when there is a slot available? As soon as delayed flights have their doors closed they would be put on standby for immediate departure in case of a free departure slot.

Despite the resistance by unpunctual carriers and maybe your hub carrier, your potential is significant.

Want to know your potential to reduce (start-up) delays with this approach? Send us your data and we will tell you.

Does EUROCONTROL A-CDM improve departure punctuality?

For those who prefer executive summaries, just scroll down.

Don't get me wrong. I am a full supporter of Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) whether it is driven by EUROCONTROL, FAA, SESAR, an airport operator, a local ATC, or even a software vendor. However, CDM, as I understand it, goes beyond data exchange. It is the participation of the airport community when it comes to decisions of the airport about the development of future infrastructure and in daily operation.

According to publicly available information improvements by ECTRL A-CDM include reduced taxi times, fuel savings, better slot adherence, less late gate changes, less network delays, and higher arrival and departure punctuality. The departure punctuality might be the most important element in this list for an airport and its stakeholders. Why? Because airports, airlines and service providers need to allocate reserve capacities for strategic (already planned buffers) and tactical (operational day) delays.

In my recent post about airport punctuality myths I mentioned that I conducted some research about the effect of ECTRL A-CDM on departure punctuality. There were two problems with this. First, as already pointed out in the other post, departure punctuality measured in percent is an imperfect metric. And I am still going to use that impudently. Secondly, there is not much data publicly available.

For the following analysis I used data from the Association of European Airlines (AEA) who themselves receive data from airlines and Central Office of Delay Analysis (CODA). Unfortunately, the data only covers AEA airlines and it does not include passenger figures. But for the sake of this analysis I assume that AEA airlines traffic is the most critical (in terms of turnaround process for instance).

What did I analyze? I investigated all A-CDM Airports according to the DPI implementation status and split them in two categories: (1) Fully compliant (DPI operational) and  (2) Locally implemented. I was expecting the following effect from an A-CDM implementation: (a) sustainable improvement of punctuality after implementation, (b) solid punctuality during adverse conditions (i.e. last winter), (c) continuous improvement, i.e. actual year at least as good as last year with more traffic or better than last year with less traffic and (d) a positive punctuality trend in the last 12 months.

Executive summary:

The following table lists the investigated airports and the findings. Example charts of individual airports can be found below.

In a nutshell:

• Being an 'A-CDM' airport does not mean that your departure punctuality improves sustainably.
• Even though the number of flights decreased at most European airports, punctuality has not improved.
• Most A-CDM airports spiral downwards in adverse conditions, i.e. winter operations.

And one more thing which I noted during the analysis:

• It is a crying shame that we work in an industry which publishes departure times and at most European airports only about every second flight actually departs on time.

Here are some example charts of the investigated airports. If you would like more of them, just let me know - jweder (at) neuropie.com.

 

Three Myths About Airport Punctuality

While Ryanair is boasting to be the most punctual European airline, Oman Air celebrates one day of 100% on-time performance on April 26 this year. Unfortunately there is no public data that proves any of these claims.

What about airports? In April 2011 London Heathrow published a record 94% departure punctuality.  Now they are Britain's worst airport according to the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA).

I think it's time to wade through some of the myths and confusion surrounding airport punctuality.

1. Punctuality is an internationally standardized metric.

Punctuality targets are usually defined in terms of 15-minute punctuality, i.e. a flight is counted as departing on-time if the plane goes off-blocks within 15 minutes of the scheduled time of  departure. But what is "15 minutes"? Is it more than 14'59" or more than 15' or even more than 15'59"? Now some airports and airlines may disagree on this but even ACI, IATA and AEA don't. If they do, then it will probably be 15'59", stealing another minute from the passenger, airline and airport capacity just to look better.

And, have you compared off-blocks times of airport and airline? Some airports check and validate differences within +/- 1 minute, most don't. Result: airport and airline report different punctuality figures.

2. Punctuality is a great metric to benchmark.

In previous posts I was highlighting some flaws of punctuality as a metric.

• Cancellations of delayed flights improve punctuality
• Indicator ignores size of aircraft and number of passengers affected
• No assessment about the financial loss possible
• Mix of performance which can be influenced with exogenous factors
• Difficult to determine improvement measures

Why is it still used, even as internal target? Because it is easy to understand and when it is bad, it can be easily attributed to exogenous factors.

3. Eurocontrol A-CDM improves airport punctuality.

There is no evidence that ECTRL A-CDM improves punctuality. Yes, it might reduce taxi times but with a negative effect on departure punctuality. With the lack of evidence I did some research myself and present the findings in my next post.

I know it is easy to lament. What do I have to offer instead? An approach and metrics to actually address the issue together with other stakeholders. Because the airport can have that 360° view and not just the silo view by every other stakeholder.

Interesting interview

Pedro Garcia who writes a blog (http://www.aeriaa.com/) has asked me a number of interesting questions. Please see the answers in his latest post: http://www.aeriaa.com/2013/04/07/airtalk-with-jurgen-weder-neuropies-ceo/

The love-hate relationship between airport operator and hub carrier

There are mutual dependencies between an airport operator and a hub carrier. Both companies contribute to the overall product "Airport". In many subject areas, the interests of both parties are therefore identical. Different interests can occur in subject areas in which the airport operator represents the interests of all airport users and they do not meet the interests of the hub carrier, or where the airport is representing their own interests.

Different Roles

The airport operator is holding the concession to operate the airport and is therefore responsible that the infrastructure is used efficiently and suffices to accommodate future growth. The planning and the day-by-day management of infrastructural resources should therefore stay where the financial responsibility is located i.e. with the airport. Airports leaving the management of infrastructure to airlines will be faced with inefficiency and continuous demands for more and better infrastructure which produces higher costs (for example inefficient resource allocation and lack of control of slot adherence). A hub carrier is planning their network and schedule in order to satisfy the demand of passenger and cargo transportation and in doing so, to make as much profit as possible. For an airline, the planning of resources like aircraft and crews is their core competence and should not be handed over to an airport as the financial responsibility to shareholders lies exclusively with the airline.

Different Businesses

There is a big difference of the cost structure between airline and airport. An airline has 70-80% variable costs. In case of an economic downturn it will reduce costs by eliminating flights with a low profitability and can so reduce their main expenditures substantially and quickly. The planning horizon is usually 2 flight seasons except for fleet planning which is covering 2 to maximum 5 years. An airport has 70-80% fixed costs. The main cost factor, infrastructure, cannot be reduced quickly if revenues drop because airlines cut their flight schedule. Airports therefore tend to build functional infrastructure which is cheap to build and maintain. The planning horizon (master plan) covers often the best part of the concession period and can be as long as 30 to 50 years.

Conflict 

Though the relationship between hub carrier and the airport is a symbiotic one there are conflicts in the one between hub carrier and hub airport. From the airport’s view, the hub carrier presents with its big market share a cluster risk and a danger to its independence. To attract other airlines is the sensible thing to do in order to mitigate those risks, at least from an economical and entrepreneurial point of view. This is a balancing act though, because the airport has to be careful not to cause a too competitive environment in order to prevent an adverse effect on its main customer. The hub carrier in turn expects from the airport a better and more exclusive infrastructure than the other airlines to get a competitive advantage. All this of course offered at costs which should lie considerably below the prices paid by competitors for less suitable facilities. And there should be no competition, even to destinations presently not served by the hub carrier.

Conclusion

This conflict exists at most of the hubs of this world. It should be addressed by airport and hub carrier in order to find a cooperation model without intruding into the partners business or responsibility. It should not be lopsided but serving both partners even if it means compromising. It should allow both, airport and hub carrier to grow and to conduct its business within limits to be agreed on in a memorandum of understanding, without interference of the partner.

Why it is counterproductive to let passengers know how long waiting lines are

People say that knowledge is power. The more knowledge, the more power. Suppose you knew the winning numbers for the lottery?  What would you do? You would run to the store and mark those numbers on the play card. And you would win.

Same for airports? Suppose you knew the waiting time at checkpoints like at Dulles International Airport. What would you do? Experience shows that when there is not much waiting time passengers tend to dwell and get to the checkpoint later. Which may create a problem later. It also shows that when there is long waiting time passengers tend to go to the checkpoint immediately. Which increases the problem now.

I think that airports should endeavor to steer the passengers indirectly based on the information they have. They may wait to announce gates until they see that there is capacity at checkpoints. They may change gates of arriving flights or bring passengers to other arrival halls.

Airport business is full of decisions and judgements and guesses, and also looking outside of the box.

The need for airport performance indicators

All businesses, whether in the public or private sector, need to measure and monitor their performance. The use of performance measures in the airport industry is particularly important because of the specific characteristics of airports. In a perfectly competitive environment, market forces will ensure that optimal performance can be equated with profitability. However, the conditions under which airports operate, are far from competitive. Regulatory, geographical, economic, social, and political constraints all hinder direct competition between airports. At the same time, the extent to which airports can attract other airports' traffic with different price levels or service levels is also very limited. Most airports therefore enjoy a quasi-monopolistic position and may abuse such a position by extracting high revenues from their customers. Profit may not equate with efficiency and productivity. Moreover, overall profitability is totally inadequate as a measure of the economic performance of discrete activity areas within an airport.

However, many airports still assess their performance by solely measuring profit or traffic growth. This in spite of a growing awareness by airport management of the financial and commercial implications of operating an airport.

Example: Sydney Airport Performance

 

Only a few airports have developed a systematic approach towards measuring performance. In general, there is no accepted industry practice for measuring airport performance. Additional indicators measuring the inputs and outputs in both physical and financial terms are essential.

In the coming weeks, we will explore more about how to measure an airport operation's efficiency and productivity. We will discuss performance indicators which serve as a management tool for the airports themselves. They are used to analyze and monitor past and present performance. Most importantly, they should make sure that management understands the financial mechanism of airport operation.

The role of an Airport Management Center for efficient operations

It is certainly a challenge to improve or at least maintain on-time performance and service quality with a continuously growing number of passengers. Airports are establishing structures, processes and technologies to address the challenges of today and the future. Eurocontrol's initiative of Airport Collaborative Decision Making (A-CDM) aims at improving the airside process with a focus on the aircraft turnaround. What about the rest? What about structures, processes and technologies to address this area of business together with the airport partners?

Coordination on ground is a quite complex matter. There are multiple players with their own coordination centers providing disparate services. You will find many shared processes and responsibilities though. Service levels are not aligned and processes have many interdependencies. Even though there are infrastructure limitations, airport and ATC slots, winter operation or specific passenger behavior, you will find rarely a 'superordinated' coordination.

An Airport Management Center (AMC) can address this challenge. The airport operator manages the operation together with their partners. Supported by the top managers of all partners the common goal is operational excellence. The key services are coordinated in one room, moderated by the airport, based on a free flow of information. This will not only require a room but also efficient IT systems.

However, are you ready for this change of culture? The airport's top management must be convinced that this change is necessary in order to achieve its goal. Unfortunately, most of the time such a re-thinking is triggered only after a bigger or smaller crisis. The starting point is a paradigm shift from administrating to orchestrating the operation. There the airport operator takes a leading role in managing the airport operation. The next challenge will be internal shifts of power and responsibilities. This is usually where such projects fail because it may include organizational changes.

After having overcome the mostly internal hurdles, the airport will have to take the initiative and convince their partners to join the center, build the room, implement new IT systems, and to provide know-how transfer and training.

What are the main functions of an AMC? It is an information center which collects and disseminates information. It facilitates communication because peers are sitting in the same room and can talk freely and efficiently. Decisions are made in a collaborative and coordinated manner. Of course, it also creates goodwill amongst the airport partners and a community feeling. Eventually, efficient teamwork, control over operational activities and a leading role by the airport will be achieved.

American queuing 76% better than individual queues

Once the flow of passengers passes a control point (security, passport) which has more than one control position, American Queuing system has clear psychological and physical benefits against individual queues.

• Passengers is neither stressed by long lines even before he lines up nor does it give the impression of chaos.
• They will not ask themselves whether they are in the wrong line, because the waiting time is the same for all passengers.
• The queue will not block because of a "difficult case" which takes longer than usual.
• The waiting time in the queue is not dependent on the performance of a single counter but depends on the number of occupied counters and on the average processing times.
• The movement of the waiting passenger accelerates according to the number of available counters, i.e. the waiting time seems shorter for the waiting passengers (the queue moves constantly forward).
• Individual queues need 76% more waiting area. With large number of passengers, passenger circulation is very limited or even prevented.

Sure there are disadvantage of the American Queuing system: It must be actively managed by 1-2 people in order to ensure optimal throughput at the checkpoint. And, when there are empty queues the posts and tapes interfere with the aesthetics of the waiting area.

Empower your Airport Duty Managers

Most often, operational problems are not caused by the airport infrastructure, but lie in the organization. You may find situations where daily operation is focused on airside and on troubleshooting only. Processes are hardly perceived as such and infrastructure and maintenance deficiences are considered to be issues of specialized services. Work is primarily reactive. Airport Duty Managers wait until a problem is reported and then try to resolve it or refer the caller to another department (maintenance & engineering, IT, cleaning, etc.). They do not feel responsible. The obvious reaction of the affected is to call senior airport executives instead to make things happen.

How can we empower our staff, intensify the dialogue with the airport partners and in particular implement a process focus?

1. Assign responsibility for each core process to an Airport Duty Manager which covers infrastructure and quality of that process.
2. Make sure that process weaknesses and infrastructure issues are continuously addressed in a structured manner.
3. Define, implement and monitor service levels with internal and external partners.
4. Discuss and implement contingency plans together with the partners.
5. Establish a dialogue with partners on each management level with a discussion about quality and performance.
6. Make partners aware of the issues and how you address them.

 And we may achieve

• Better cooperation with partners.
• Mutual understanding about each other's business and its issues.
• Partners become more aware of what the airport actually delivers, day by day.
• Airport users percieve the improvements in quality and performance and the image will improve.
• More airlines are attracted.

How can CDM help to get off the list of the 10 of the world's most hated airports?

Some of the international airports' reputation has been shaken with a world-leading news website ranking them as the most hated airports in the world. CNNGO.com published a report this week titled “10 of the world’s most hated airports”.

According to the journalist the most hated airports in the world are not the worst airports in the world. However, "the worst part may be this airport’s aura of indifference to it all."

Shouldn't Airport CDM also deal with passenger experience? Or, do we just hope that by exchanging information between stakeholders the performance and they way we deal with disruptions will improve automatically?

Who is afraid of EC Regulation 691/2010?

The EUROCONTROL Performance Review Commission (PRC) has been analyzing the performance of the European Air Traffic Management System since 1998. Initially, the focus was on en-route ATM performance. Some indicators from this framework were selected in 2010 for regular monitoring of operational airport ANS operational performance. Three of the flight efficiency indicators have been adopted as airport capacity indicators for Reference Period 1 (2012-2014) in the SES II performance scheme:

• Air Traffic Flow Management (ATFM) Arrival Delay
• Taxi-Out Additional Time
• Arrival Sequencing and Metering Area (ASMA) Additional Time
  

So this is all about ANS and EUROCONTROL.Why, despite delivering data to EUROCONTROL, should an Airport Operator bother about it? Well, it may fall back on them.

Let us take the Taxi-Out Additional Time as an example. The indicator measures the delta between the Actual Off-Block Time (AOBT) and the Actual Take-Off Time (ATOT). Now if you us airline data, they may report very long taxi times. Longer times than the Airport Operator. Why? Firstly, they may measure the AOBT differently because they use a different source than the airport, for instance ACARS. Secondly, since stations are evaluated against outbound delays, they will try to 'optimize' the AOBT to remain within the 15 minutes IATA threshold and report accordingly to their headquarters. You know what I mean.

Now here comes the problem. Whoever will get the blame (and potentially penalties) about long taxi times will have to demonstrate that it was not them causing it. As an Airport Operator, would you like to engage with the parties about this sort of questions when the performance regime has been implemented and the results have been published? Maybe the Airport Operator will already want to engage in the process to make sure that  questions about data quality, measuring standards, including reasons and impact of delays, is being addressed now.

Let us grow off-peaks

Many airports continuously operate at or above capacity. Not necessarily throughout the day, but during peak hours. The most obvious solution to this problem is to make the airport infrastructure match the demand. However, there may be economical, political, environmental, space, time or other constraints preventing this. What about other approaches which are feasible without major investments and in a shorter timeframe?

Obviously, you can improve your current operational performance. You will find posts here about efficiency and effectivity, basically doing the right things right. There is, however, an area I have not explored yet, why not grow off-peaks? Let me explore two out of many textbook solutions to this problem.

Peak Pricing

One straight forward approach would be to differentiate the price of airport slots between different periods. There are often significant variations in the demand for slots at different times of day, on different days of the week and during different months of the year which can result in airports operating at full capacity at peak periods, whilst many slots may remain unused at off-peak periods. If the price of a peak period slot was higher than the price of an off-peak slot the demand for slots may be rescheduled.

Aviation Marketing

Aviation/airline marketing teams work together with airlines to explore market opportunities, support start-up operations and to help maintain a positive long-term partnership between the airline and the airport. Now this sounds great and simple to attract airlines for peak times. It may be hard though to attract them for off-peak periods, but let me give you an example on how this could be achieved. There may be this legacy carrier which is the only airline flying a specific route. Suppose you can convince an airline, e.g. a no frill airline, to operate to the same destination during off-peak times. How? Maybe you offer them a kick-back for every additional passenger on this route, including additional passengers flying on the legacy carrier. Winners? The airport, the new airline and ground handlers. Loosers? The legacy carrier which looses some yield, but do you care as an airport?

I am not sure whether this works at every airport, it has worked at least at one. Why not give it a try?

We Need To Know When Something Does Not Happen

An event is anything that happens. A business event is an event that has a meaning to conduct commercial activities. Examples at the airport include a passenger checking in, a runway closure, a change in the ATC acceptance rate, an aircraft touchdown, aircraft doors closing, and a failure in the baggage sorting system. Events small and large take place all day, every day in every corner of a company and its environment.

A fundamental characteristics of events is that they cannot be entirley foreseen. Some events require actions as a direct response, for instance when the runway visibilty drops under a specific threshold. Other events are opportunities that can be exploited. For example, when a flight is cancelled, the stranded passengers could be directed to a desk which requires walking through a shopping area.



Now, an event is "something that happens" which is fine but raises the question of what to do when something which is expected to happen does not happen. For example, aircraft boarding should start 35 minutes prior to off-blocks. For this we need to know the expected boarding time based on standards, we need the latest departure time (planned or estimated) and we need to know the current status of the flight. We need to monitor this all the time. And, we must make sure that we are not getting an alert every second in the event, that boarding has not started on time. Why do we need to know this information at all? Because a late boarding is a very good indicator for a late departure.

This is just one example of time-based or timed-out events. You may want to build this and other features on top of legacy operational systems or you may want to use our brilliant and proven real-time processing system to handle this for you for all systems, every day, all the time.

3 Reasons Why Airport Operators Are Not Customer Oriented

All what passengers want is good service, including less delays and less lost bags. They do not care who owns or runs the airport. Though there is a lot of discussion about passenger experience there are a few reasons why airports are not customer focussed.

Here are the top three:



1. Airport Operators do not know who their customer is. There was this Airport Operator who had an executive meeting to kick-off their Balanced Scorecard process. The goal of the first workshop was to define the Balanced Scorecard. After a day's discussion they had to abort the meeting, because they could not agree on who their customer was. Airline or passenger? Or even retailer, or visitor? They all deliver revenue.

2. Airport Operators lack competition. In another post I was highlighting the fact that for local passengers there is no real competition between airports. Suppose you live and work in Zurich. Would you choose Munich or Geneva as your home airport because you encountered bad service at Zurich Airport? Not really.

3. Airport Operators do not think short-term. Airport Operators are a different species if you look at all the other stakeholders at the airport. Airlines, ground handlers, retailers, they all have to move quickly to consistently win their customers. They face high variable cost while Airport Operators are investment driven with high fix cost. Airport Operators think in master plans and capex and do not look at current customer (who is it?) needs. Not in the short term.

Why we wait for bags to arrive at the carousel

I received an e-mail from a colleague who recently experienced Zurich Airport. He said that the baggage was amazingly fast on the carousel and wished we could do something at his home airport.

My response was that there were a number of hurdles which were hard to overcome first:

1. Lack of competition: This is the biggest hurdle. Airports are usually monopolists for local passengers. If you need to wait a few more minutes at the baggage carousel, how would that influence your decision on choosing your destination airport?

2. Lack of awareness: How big is the problem? If the airport the asks the ground handlers about the bag delivery performance, guess what answer you will get? It must be truly excellent. What all partners are not aware of, that they are in the same boat, because the passenger will rate the overall quality. Maybe immigration could help with longer queues before we get into the arrival hall ...

3. Lack of accountability: As an airport you can always respond to a complaint that you are terribly sorry and claim that it is not your responsibility but the ground handler's or airline's. In fact, I have seen such letters. Well, some airports start to include service levels into their ground handler license. But, wait, isn't the airline (in fact the passenger) paying for that service?

4. Lack of transparency: The ground handler will not share their performance provided that the bag delivery times are even measured. Now, how can we motivate the ground handler to capture the first bag / last bag information and share it with you?

5. Lack of cooperation: Standards can only be defined and reviewed together. If they are not being met, then there can be a fact based discussion, where the airport is only interested in the output (result) and not the input.

There is light at the end of the tunnel because more and more airport operators become aware that passenger experience is important, in particular for arriving passengers. Even though some of them have no choice, this is part of the first experiences when you arrive at a city, region or country.

How to resolve this, how to overcome the hurdles? Well, true CDM (airside, terminal and landside), incorporated into the organisations, processes, systems and governance is a great enabler to achieve this. Why not ask the airport who was awarded with the best airport baggage delivery award in 2010?

Changing role of airport operators

Airports used to be less complicated. There were less specialized functions, and they neither faced major cost problems nor significant infrastructure capacity constraints. They were managed from a regulatory and authority perspective rather than operations. The focus was on construction and being a landlord. Management processes were not too complex.

Since then traditional operational performance indicators and their relevance have not been reviewed. One example, I already covered, is the punctuality. It measures the percentage of flights departed/arrived on time with a certain tolerance e.g. 15 minutes delay. However, cancellations are not considered, there is no distinction between long and short delays, the number of passengers affected is not included and reasons for delays are not clear.

Whatever the airport's strategic position, being a premium airport or a commodity airport (same applies to terminals), there is a case to manage the operational processes and to manage the performance of all airport users - the airlines and service providers (e.g. handlers, ATC). The aim is to reduce the risk of complexity and the risk that organizations optimize their business at the expense of other stakeholders.

Let me give you an example, suppose that an airline 'runs' an airport or terminal. Which stands would they allocate to their competition? The easy accessible, nice and convenient one's?

Sure, for an airport operator to change its role is easier said then done. The airport operator will need to have the capability and tools. But from what I observe internationally, this is the direction airport's are driving towards to.

Airports grow in peaks

During the economic downturn passenger numbers fell remarkably. However, we noticed two interesting trends. Firstly, the record slump was mostly with local passengers, best in class airports were stable or increased their transfer passengers. Secondly, the peaks grew! Traffic grew where there is most value added which is obviously in the peaks. Difficult times for airport operation managers who ask for more resources while passenger figures are going down.

I spoke to a head of operations recently who was struggling with consultants who were trying to convince him that over time his airport would grow in off-peak. Definitely worth thinking about when you do your planning. Our experience shows that airports grow in peaks.



See this example: At this airport, the number of days with peak traffic increased dramatically. You will notice that year to date 2010 there were already 9 days with more than 75'000 passengers and 7 days with more than 80'000 passengers.

Stay on top of the game

The Swiss Victor Röthlin won marathon gold on Swiss national day. His career seemed finished after a series of health problems, but he completely dominated the field of 65 men who competed in the 20th European Championships Marathon. This got me thinking about what it really takes to be a winner in business.

As I watched him run I realized that I, like so many others, had no clue of the training regimen required to compete at this level. Most people cannot imagine what it is like to train for a single race. Athletes at that level make it look easy. Sure, without talent they would never have made it that far. But talent alone is not enough. To be successful at anything, whether sport or business, requires a combination of talent, skill, and desire.

True success in business leads to high incomes, a flexible lifestyle, and the attainment of goals that most people only dream of. If you look around you, top business professionals make it look easy. But we can’t imagine the effort that top performers put into training. But top performers do. To be great in business we must invest in ourselves– mind, body, and spirit. We must train like an athlete. We must stay on top of our game.

How does this relate to Airport Operation? I’ve overheard operations managers describe the consistent high performance of top airports as “magical.” They can’t imagine the effort that top performers put into continuous improvement. They don’t understand that success in always paid for in advance. World class airport professionals listen and learn constantly. They strive for improvement potentials in their business constantly. The average and poor performers don’t have time to listen or to look for new answers, think that this is a waste of time. Or, they have more important issues to resolve right now. Some are only open for change when they are in trouble.

Promote blog