BA Management

[Boxkite Montgolfier]

I am beginning to wonder what is in the tea served at BA Board Meetings in recent times?
Announcements of large scale B737 Max orders, hard rumours of removing First Class, potential changes to historic Staff arrangements, Pension mismanagement etc

[cjhants]

The old saying used to go, if it ain’t broke- don’t fix it. The current management in most large companies fear doing nothing will cost their jobs, so change things just to make it look like they are doing something to justify their salary.

[DaveReidUK]

The old saying used to go, if it ain’t broke- don’t fix it. The current management in most large companies fear doing nothing will cost their jobs, so change things just to make it look like they are doing something to justify their salary.

"We trained hard - but it seemed that every time we were beginning to form up into teams we were reorganized. I was to learn later in life that we tend to meet any new situation by reorganizing, and what a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while actually producing confusion, inefficiency, and demoralization."

Charlton Ogburn (though sometime mis-attributed to Petronius Arbiter)

[SMT Member]

There's a whole sub-division of uselessness in the corporate world called 'change management', living under the illusion that not constantly changing things around means not following with the times. As is always the case, such sub-divisions develop ambitions way beyond their initial brief, and starts attempting to see what the future will bring and act accordingly. It almost always goes wrong, but since 'change management' is seen is a vital component of running a major business, all of senior management is fully vested in the idea and the concepts they develop. Thus the usual recipe for yet another failed attempt at developing a crystal ball, is to promote the senior change manager and throw even more money at it.

In the mean time, those guys and girls actually running the show are left bewildered, confused, demoralised and in utter contempt of their management. As this seeps through to the bottom line, more money, time and resources are thrown at 'change management', in an attempt to break the cycle.

Yes, they are indeed that stupid. But my oh my, do they ever surround themselves with an avalanche of fancy words, visions and missions.

[Astir 511]

If you always do, what you always did, you'll always get what you always got. Too many fine British Historical brands have gone to the wall, because they refused to Change, Adapt, Innovate.

[clipstone1]

BA have not ordered any aircraft, they never do. BA is just a subsidiary of a much larger organisation IAG. It is IAG who have signed an letter of intent to buy 200 B737 MAX aircraft, which will then be used by carious subsidiaries, one of which includes BA at LGW.

Admitedly interesting timing (means they were given an even better deal to announce now) and an interesting choice for a predominently Airbus shorthaul operator.

[old,not bold]

SMT Member; an excellent, succinct, comprehensive and accurate paragraph.

(I treasure my memory of being asked to leave a senior management meeting in BAA after saying "No point. You can't kick against the pricks." when asked to explain why I thought that some proposed "changes" were a pointless waste of time and money.)

[Andy_S]

If you always do, what you always did, you'll always get what you always got. Too many fine British Historical brands have gone to the wall, because they refused to Change, Adapt, Innovate.

True. It may not be "broke" but it will become outdated if you fail to innovate or consider changing customer requirements.

[oggers]

In the market in which these companies operate they have to adapt or they can quickly founder..

Taking first class as an example, the fundamental econimics of airline class require that good management keep it under review.

economics of airline class

Meanwhile, the LoI for the MAX strikes me as rational given that keen competition between Airbus and Boeing can only be good for IAG.

[Private jet]

Perhaps ironically, the old saying goes "the only real constant in life is change". But it has to be evolutionary change, not the "blue sky thinking" ideas dreamt up by idiots with business management degrees at strategy seminars.

[ASRAAMTOO]

The reason for stating an intent to buy the 737 Max is probably similar to the reason IAG bought the A350 and that is to keep the alternate supplier honest.

Fleet logistics would generate substantial savings by having an all Boeing long haul fleet.....but only if you can buy them at a sensible price. The same applies in short haul, and with the current difficulties Boeing are having with the MAX I rather suspect the price of shorthaul Airbusses are as high as they have ever been, not to mention them likely ramping up support costs.

Conversely the Max price may well be at an all time low and lets face it they won't get delivered/payed for if the problem does not get fixed.

[Andy_S]

........not the "blue sky thinking" ideas dreamt up by idiots with business management degrees.....

It didn't seem to do Ryanair any harm.

[WHBM]

I am beginning to wonder what is in the tea served at BA Board Meetings in recent times?
Announcements of large scale B737 Max orders, hard rumours of removing First Class, potential changes to historic Staff arrangements, Pension mismanagement etc
As described by others, BA Board did not order the aircraft, they are ordered by IAG and allocated as later seems appropriate, expected to be to the various Low-Cost arms; Vueling, Level, and BA Gatwick.

Did you see IAG also ordered 14 A321XLR the previous day at Paris ?

Every time for a generation or more a large BA/IAG order has been placed there are comments about "they are going all Boeing which is why Airbus lost", "they are going all Airbus which is why Boeing lost", "they deliberately try to keep it 50-50", and so on, selected to match the circumstance.

First Class is generally on its way out, worldwide; Business Class now is better, especially for seating, than First was a generation ago (when it was nothing more than larger, somewhat-reclining 2-abreast seats). Revenue per square metre of cabin floor is falling below that for Business. A notable proportion of F occupancy is not paying the full whack at all, but upgrades, mileage redemption, toadying to CIPs/VIPs on lesser tickets, etc.

[Private jet]

It didn't seem to do Ryanair any harm.

I think that is mostly due to copying the Southwest airlines model and a healthy dose of right place-right time.

[Rated De]

"We trained hard - but it seemed that every time we were beginning to form up into teams we were reorganized. I was to learn later in life that we tend to meet any new situation by reorganizing, and what a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while actually producing confusion, inefficiency, and demoralization."

Charlton Ogburn (though sometime mis-attributed to Petronius Arbiter)

In the antipodes, Alan Joyce fills column inches in daily rags with diversity, inclusion, reduced waste flights and statements about same sex marriage.
Re-equipping Qantas, the least efficient airline across the Pacific the furthest thing from his mind.Can even ask Cousin Willie (IAG) how to order an aircraft for Qantas.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-17/qantas-fuel-efficiency-worst-for-trans-pacific-flights-study/933361


"When you don't know what to do, just do something..."

-Sustaining talentless management for decades.

[Andy_S]

I think that is mostly due to copying the Southwest airlines model and a healthy dose of right place-right time.

You're quite right of course. But the underlying point is still valid. Someone looked at the business model and decided not to leave it as it was, or to fine-tune it, but to fundamentally change it.

[Reverserbucket]

I fly BA a lot (10 S/H sectors in the past 7 days), usually down the back, and have very recently been introduced to the Recaro seats on the 320's. The routes I fly tend to be served by other operators and are quite often more keenly priced however historically, I choose BA because they offered a higher standard of service and, believe it or not, more comfortable seating than their competitors. When the M&S BoB was introduced, I paid, like everyone else for a cup of tea and a KitKat, but the new seats are really beyond the pale in my opinion - quite uncomfortable, non-reclining with less room and a hook to hang my jacket in front rather than at the side with a somewhat smaller tray table. This has completely changed my passenger experience and I will be looking at the alternatives from now on - I will not pay for a Club seat for the sectors I fly. Easy and most of the competition now effectively offer the same for less money. If this is an example of 'Change, Adapt, Innovate' I will do so by taking my business elsewhere.

[Paul Lupp]

..or as I have put it
"To fly, to serve" has become "To fly, to screw as much money out of the passenger as possible"

I still recall the wonderful cooked breakfasts that were served on the "shuttle" flights from LHR to Edinburgh, Glasgow and Manchester in the 1980's/1990's; made it a real pleasure to fly BA whereas now, I almost concede that the one maoin reason I pick is the ease of getting to LHR T5 compared to the other terminals. Am also re-evaluating my loyalty, based on recent experiences having chosen to fly BA with my own money exclusively for over 25 years (albeit an occasional passenger rather than a regular)

[Astir 511]

I fly BA a lot (10 S/H sectors in the past 7 days), usually down the back, and have very recently been introduced to the Recaro seats on the 320's. The routes I fly tend to be served by other operators and are quite often more keenly priced however historically, I choose BA because they offered a higher standard of service and, believe it or not, more comfortable seating than their competitors. When the M&S BoB was introduced, I paid, like everyone else for a cup of tea and a KitKat, but the new seats are really beyond the pale in my opinion - quite uncomfortable, non-reclining with less room and a hook to hang my jacket in front rather than at the side with a somewhat smaller tray table. This has completely changed my passenger experience and I will be looking at the alternatives from now on - I will not pay for a Club seat for the sectors I fly. Easy and most of the competition now effectively offer the same for less money. If this is an example of 'Change, Adapt, Innovate' I will do so by taking my business elsewhere.

You make a valid point (And I actually agree it is an uncomfortable seat), and you will not be alone in taking your business elsewhere. The harsh reality of Business Economics, is that BA are forecasting that the lost revenue from migrating/lost passengers, will be more than offset by the reduced costs of fuel burn with a lighter seat, and higher density (if that's the case with the Recaro Seat.) I would also point out that Team Orange are retrofitting to the Recaro seat, so our options to Europe from UK may require that we take a Cushion (Or we can buy one on board - Nice Ancillary Revenue Stream!!!)

[Reverserbucket]

I thought U2 were already using the Recaro's - they looked familiar when I saw the BA ones. I understand that the densified seating with the Recaro's and other enhancements have lead to complaints, but the basic fact is that judging by the majority of fellow customers I see each week, few would really notice any difference as most travel infrequently. I liked flying BA and have been a loyal customer for decades, always selecting them over the competition if available for both short and long-haul. I have plenty of hours in other operators aircraft/lounges etc. but have remained faithful to the BA product, until now.

I had a long conversation with a former colleague who has been with BA for a number of years last week and was dismayed to discover how low his morale is based on a number of recent changes, not least the removal of the last DFO which I understand really affected some who thought of him as highly capable. He also mentioned the use of mixed-fleet cabin crew (with the hats) and their T&Cs which I understand to be quite different to legacy CC contracts at BA. What might he have meant?

[occasional]

If you always do, what you always did, you'll always get what you always got. Too many fine British Historical brands have gone to the wall, because they refused to Change, Adapt, Innovate.

Are you sure that they did not go to the wall because the spectators/stock market got bored with companies that simply got on with their jobs ? eg ICI, English Electric.

[The AvgasDinosaur]

True. It may not be "broke" but it will become outdated if you fail to innovate or consider changing customer requirements.
Nearly I believe the phrase is ‘change customer requirements’ NB the consent or knowledge of the customer is optional!
Be lucky
David

[Jack D]

Change and adaptation is always necessary as long as it’s well researched and finally effective ..
I always liked the timeless conclusions drawn in “The credibility trap “ by J K Galbraith, just as valid today as when it was first written ...

[USERNAME_]

He also mentioned the use of mixed-fleet cabin crew (with the hats) and their T&Cs which I understand to be quite different to legacy CC contracts at BA. What might he have meant?


BA MF Cabin Crew are on arguably one of the worst cabin crew contracts in the UK. Worse than Easyjet & Jet2, and considerably worse than Thomas Cook, TUI and Virgin, it's also a lot worse than their counterparts over at LCY working for BA Cityflyer. It's slightly better than LGW crew though, if that helps......

The only attraction to the job is the brand name, the uniform, and the glamorous destinations in which they get to spend minimum rest nightstops.

[Espada III]

Flew BA from MAN to LHR a few weeks ago as I had a day long meeting in a hotel just off-airport. Stayed overnight the night before the meeting and was going to go back to T5 for a fairly long wait for the flight home when a colleague offered me a lift. I chose the lift, partly because I found the seats and leg room so uncomfortable compared to EZY, and I fly EZY at least four sectors per annum.

Next time I am taking the train and Heathrow Express. Not much cheaper but more comfortable and almost as convenient.

[Astir 511]

Why would the stock market and shareholders get bored with an investment if it is competitive, reduces costs and maximises profit. If as an industry we don’t innovate we would still be flying the same as Orville and Wilbur. Not all Changes will work, but you have to try. 10% of successful change and innovation is still better than none. Easy to sit on the sidelines criticising management, and the only suggestion is not to change and innovate.

[Forum old Bart]

BA pilots are to be balloted on strike action. If you are a traveller with a choice of airline, BA or another, for your future booking today what would you do?
Management are responsible for allowing this situation to develope. I have no connection with BA.

[marchino61]

I fly BA a lot (10 S/H sectors in the past 7 days), usually down the back, and have very recently been introduced to the Recaro seats on the 320's.

I don't really understand this comment. Aren't most airline seats (especially in economy) made by Recaro?

[occasional]

Why would the stock market and shareholders get bored with an investment if it is competitive, reduces costs and maximises profit.
Because if a fund manager can make 7% rather than 6% this year they may get paid a substantial bonus, whilst it is irrelevant that the company goes bust in 5 years time - by that time the manager will probably have moved on.

[DaveReidUK]

I don't really understand this comment. Aren't most airline seats (especially in economy) made by Recaro?

The airline seat market is pretty competitive.

New seat supplier for British Airways short-haul (https://www.businesstraveller.com/business-travel/2017/04/11/new-seat-supplier-british-airways-short-haul/)

[Astir 511]

Because if a fund manager can make 7% rather than 6% this year they may get paid a substantial bonus, whilst it is irrelevant that the company goes bust in 5 years time - by that time the manager will probably have moved on.
Respectfully, I disagree, the thread was about Management decisions within the Airline, Fund Managers don't make Operations or strategic decisions for an Airline. They rely on the Airline Mgmt to make the right decisions. Agreed theses decisions will have an element that is driven by profit, but the fund manager doesn't decide to drop the now legendary breakfast!. That is driven by Competitive landscape, and the customer preferences.

[Astir 511]

Companies don't go to the wall because Stockholders get bored and sell their shares. Share price is driven by profits and future prospects. Airlines go bust because they run out of cash. Some bankruptcies are as a result of Macro Economic conditions, others by failure to adapt to the needs of the Market, it's this element that is mostly in the power of the Airline.

[Astir 511]

I would suggest it's a bit of both, it takes two to have a disagreement. The Unions have decided to Ballot, It's actually Management and Unions who are collectively responsible, and funnily enough none of them are ever out of pocket, so it's easy to play Mexican standoff when it's not your Bank Balance.

I agree that poor Management leads to Strikes, but Unions painting a picture of significant gains in remuneration that are unreasonable/unachieveable, drive the behaviours of Union Membership.

[RexBanner]

In this particular case the pay deal Balpa are asking for is neither unreasonable or unachievable.

[occasional]

Companies don't go to the wall because Stockholders get bored and sell their shares. Share price is driven by profits and future prospects.
I responded to a post which was not particularly about airlines, so, if we stick to the aerospace sector, perhaps you would care to explain the takeover of GKN by Melrose on the basis of your analysis. The value of the two companies combined has declined substantially since the takeover about a year ago.

[Astir 511]

The thread started by Critiquing the BA Management decision to commit to the MAX aircraft, and "Was there something in the tea. It has since deviated to be a criticism of Investment funds and Hedge Funds. I don't profess to be an expert in the M&A market, But my inital premise still stands. Shareholders don't invest to drive the Share Price Down. Some will argue that there are Venture Capitalists out there who "Prey" on companies in distress, Greybull Capital being a frequently cited company, and associated Asset stripping, but the harsh reality (Monarch as an example) is these companies are already in distress, they are not driven to the wall by Venture Capitalists, they were already veering towards the wall. Sometimes a turnaround can be effected, other times it cannot, as they left it too late, which brings us nicely back to my initial point about failure to Change and innovate will kill companies.

[Astir 511]

I understand 11.5% increase over three years is on the table, Is anyone familiar with what is being demanded by BALPA.
It's around the Current Inflation rate, and seems reasonable - Unless BALPA are demanding an inflation busting % increase?

[SMT Member]

Seems to be some confusion as to the nature of the change management animal. The brief is, simply put, that the senior managers perform a strategic review and decided this, that or the other needs changing in order to get from where they are, to where they wish to be. In order to ensure all the t's are crossed and the i's are dotted, change management continually evaluates the process and make sure everything is aligned with the new direction.

So far, so good.

However, being an ambitious lot given ever wider merit, change management has a tendency to morph into an entity going around looking for things to change. It's not the really important bits, like which product to produced and how to get about transitioning the company - they spend most of their time messing around with present workflows, procedures and processes, usually with no other aim that cost cutting. And if they're not busy doing that, they try to invent a crystal ball telling which department(s) to go about changing next. This is where the deep resentment from the rank and files come from; they don't usually offer anything of value as far as the future of the company is concerned, rather they faff about changing existing procedures to match the clap trap they've been taught in business schools.

[RevMan2]

There's a whole sub-division of uselessness in the corporate world called 'change management'
Not useless at all. Change Management is the process of implementing in a structured and orderly manner initiatives decided on by the board. Whether the *initiative* itself is a brainf¢rtor not is another matter...

[david340r]

There's a whole sub-division of uselessness in the corporate world called 'change management', living under the illusion that not constantly changing things around means not following with the times. As is always the case, such sub-divisions develop ambitions way beyond their initial brief, and starts attempting to see what the future will bring and act accordingly. It almost always goes wrong, but since 'change management' is seen is a vital component of running a major business, all of senior management is fully vested in the idea and the concepts they develop. Thus the usual recipe for yet another failed attempt at developing a crystal ball, is to promote the senior change manager and throw even more money at it.

In the mean time, those guys and girls actually running the show are left bewildered, confused, demoralised and in utter contempt of their management. As this seeps through to the bottom line, more money, time and resources are thrown at 'change management', in an attempt to break the cycle.

Yes, they are indeed that stupid. But my oh my, do they ever surround themselves with an avalanche of fancy words, visions and missions.

There's nothing wrong with the philosophy of continuous improvement (often referred to as Kaizen), but what you are talking about I like to call Kaimugen or continuous (infinite) change which I've seen exacerbated by new managers wanting to make their mark.

[Twiglet1]

Seems to be some confusion as to the nature of the change management animal. The brief is, simply put, that the senior managers perform a strategic review and decided this, that or the other needs changing in order to get from where they are, to where they wish to be. In order to ensure all the t's are crossed and the i's are dotted, change management continually evaluates the process and make sure everything is aligned with the new direction.

So far, so good.

However, being an ambitious lot given ever wider merit, change management has a tendency to morph into an entity going around looking for things to change. It's not the really important bits, like which product to produced and how to get about transitioning the company - they spend most of their time messing around with present workflows, procedures and processes, usually with no other aim that cost cutting. And if they're not busy doing that, they try to invent a crystal ball telling which department(s) to go about changing next. This is where the deep resentment from the rank and files come from; they don't usually offer anything of value as far as the future of the company is concerned, rather they faff about changing existing procedures to match the clap trap they've been taught in business schools.
SMT - Well said and its not just at BA. And rest assured there are plenty of good Managers and Staff left to pick up the pieces on their weekend off (sore point for crew sorry) when the
happy clappy folk will have left on Friday lunchtime

[WHBM]

One of the worst change management excesses is deciding to have new branding, and thus a new livery. In some extreme cases where the team itself has then got new leadership a further new livery is introduced even before the rollout of the previous version is completed.

[c52]

To be fair, Change Management is the process of managing change, not of causing it.

It was the case when I worked in IT that things would work for months, and then when we changed something, failures would start to happen. Change Managment's job is to ensure that everything has been properly thought about in advance and that there are no surprises when changes are implemented.

[WHBM]

It was the case when I worked in IT that things would work for months, and then when we changed something, failures would start to happen. .
Ah. IT are in a class of their own.

"Enhancement" : A means of introducing bugs into a program that previously worked OK.

Quite relevant to this thread as the BA website is a classic example.

[Litebulbs]

Oh, airlines, unions and HR: a dream thread come true!!

Human Resource Management A Critical Text: John Story, go read.

Strategic HR and change

[keesje]

IAG's letter of intent to take 200 Boeing 737 Max jets will help prevent it from becoming a captive customer of Airbus's when it comes to the short-haul fleet, in the view of chief executive Willie Walsh.

Ill timed to announce the order it seems.

Flight article (https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/737-max-deal-saves-iag-from-being-airbus-captive-459324/)

[Sunfish]

C52:To be fair, Change Management is the process of managing change, not of causing it.


BS! Change management types are always looking for new opportunities. Say, why hasn’t PPRUNE got a voice interface?

[Longtimer]

C52:

BS! Change management types are always looking for new opportunities. Say, why hasn’t PPRUNE got a voice interface?



The answer to your question is $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ :p

[AvsecGuy]

There's a whole sub-division of uselessness in the corporate world called 'change management', living under the illusion that not constantly changing things around means not following with the times. As is always the case, such sub-divisions develop ambitions way beyond their initial brief, and starts attempting to see what the future will bring and act accordingly. It almost always goes wrong, but since 'change management' is seen is a vital component of running a major business, all of senior management is fully vested in the idea and the concepts they develop. Thus the usual recipe for yet another failed attempt at developing a crystal ball, is to promote the senior change manager and throw even more money at it.

In the mean time, those guys and girls actually running the show are left bewildered, confused, demoralised and in utter contempt of their management. As this seeps through to the bottom line, more money, time and resources are thrown at 'change management', in an attempt to break the cycle.

Yes, they are indeed that stupid. But my oh my, do they ever surround themselves with an avalanche of fancy words, visions and missions.
Your description of this above has hit the point exactly spot on. The problem is it seems to be rife with big companies nowadays. So much so that ' being a number' is not just a convenient saying but a very true scenario.

[nuisance79]

C52:

BS! Change management types are always looking for new opportunities. Say, why hasn’t PPRUNE got a voice interface?


Nope thats the called business strategy. Change management is there to make sure the new strategy is introduced as smoothly as possible.

poster was correct.