A very accurate precis:
Then we get to the Company 'Mission Statement'. Successful Companies have a single statement that clearly states what it is they do. As far as I can work out, for Qf, it's 'What's in it for me?' because Qf has demonstrated it really doesn't know what it is anymore. Webjet? National Flag Carrier? Round the world airline? Domestic airline? Jetstar? Red Q? Licencing operation? Vehicle for the CEO's political ambitions? Hard to say... I asked this question of an HR drone in a 'meeting' they generously organised for me a few years ago, and they couldn't answer the question either, in fact, it had them totally stumped. If the Thought Police cannot answer such a simple question, what hope do the rest have who don't mainline Company KoolAid hourly?
Qantas was gifted an enviable position at Privatisation. Dissected by cost accountants it has hacked itself to pieces. It is not surprising that HR drones don't know the mission because theirs is all about
self preservation and mission creep.
Qantas is not enlightened leadership, sadly
despite knowing the price of everything and neatly inserting them in a mathematical model, Mr Joyce neglected the one limitation that actually matters:
The real world dynamic of airlines is impossible to model without very expansive limitations (assumptions)
Ask any researcher or analyst about models, the limitations (assumptions) necessary to get models to work mean in fact oftentimes they are highly unstable.
From all accounts, Mr Joyce has an autocratic style, top down and whilst politically astute (Chariman's lounge, upgrades and soft corruption) does not take kindly to critique, we had experienced this with him numerous times.
Thus in trusting the model he ignores anything not contained within it. For airlines this is a really tricky proposition. In fact if one looks at airlines that do it really well, empowerment of people, like Captains exercising command judgement is something that is encouraged. At Qantas we would respectfully suggest it is punished, autonomy of people, profesisonals doing their job is actively discouraged. This doesn't bode well in highly fluid industries.
Jim Collins wrote a great book, From Good to Great one of the most eloquent empirical studies into corporate performance.
Are you a hedgehog or a fox? In his famous essay “The Hedgehog and the Fox,” Isaiah Berlin divided the world into hedgehogs and foxes, based upon an ancient Greek parable: “
The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.”
Those who built the good-to-great companies were, to one degree or another, hedgehogs. They used their hedgehog nature to drive toward what we came to call a Hedgehog Concept for their companies.
Those who led the comparison companies tended to be foxes, never gaining the clarifying advantage of a Hedgehog Concept, being instead scattered, diffused, and inconsistent. (our emphasis)
An empirical comparison of Qantas to its peers would suggest that foxes outnumber hedgehogs in Coward street.
Qantas need a new fleet