Qantas hires consultants to improve on-time performance

[RichardMEL]

You implied that HR are people, and I just have to take exception with that premise.

Oh you've met Catbert, the evil head of HR I see

They do seem to live in their own little world at times.

 

[elanshin]

Actually stopping and thinking about the intial topic, hiring external to do data analytics for OTP isn't necessarily bad.

OTP would be more data driven than customer experience or workforce related. Of course there are definitely things that the average employee can also notice and pass on feedback about, but getting into the nitty gritty, it's heavily data analysis work.

Breakdowns of delays that are less than 30mins, more then 30, more than 2h causes. Weather related, atc related. Its knock on effects etc. a lot of data work.

I'd say in this case QF has identified a customer and company pain point so have asked external help to identify and break it down more.

 

[Franky]

Actually stopping and thinking about the intial topic, hiring external to do data analytics for OTP isn't necessarily bad.

OTP would be more data driven than customer experience or workforce related. Of course there are definitely things that the average employee can also notice and pass on feedback about, but getting into the nitty gritty, it's heavily data analysis work.

Breakdowns of delays that are less than 30mins, more then 30, more than 2h causes. Weather related, atc related. Its knock on effects etc. a lot of data work.

I'd say in this case QF has identified a customer and company pain point so have asked external help to identify and break it down more.

I agree with what you say, however I think what we all know is that QF have many other issues which have been mentioned. They are as important as being on time, but that issue is something they don't have complete control over.

 

[elanshin]

I agree with what you say, however I think what we all know is that QF have many other issues which have been mentioned. They are as important as being on time, but that issue is something they don't have complete control over.

I don't disagree with that, just that on the overall sentiment of using a consultant to look more into OTP isn't the same as getting a consultant to fix customer experience.

 

[jb747]

Long time since I've done any domestic flying, but an example of the way they work.

The 767s were used to be scheduled with about an hour on the ground at each port. We could turn them around in less than that, but that gave plenty of time for cleaners, cabin crew, and engineering. It also meant that we had enough time to be able to correct any delays that might have happened previously.

And then someone arrived in the ivory tower, and worked out that you get get much more utilization of the aircraft if you scheduled them for 40 minute turnarounds. So, now they scheduled everything for 40 minutes. We could do than until something went wrong. As soon as there was any sort of delay, it would ripple forward, with no buffer to accommodate it. By the time of the last flights of the day, they were often swapping aircraft around as the scheduled one would be elsewhere, and the crew could well be in yet another location. But, on paper at least, the utilization improved so "Fred" got his huge bonus. In practice of course, delays had increased across the entire fleet. Much the same thing happened with crew, where they had people moving from aircraft to aircraft, never allowing for the time that took, or the effect of prior delays.

Oh, and the marketing induced delays. They used to publish a schedule using flight times that were simply unachievable. The advertised gate to gate time was shorter than the actual flight time. I followed this up, and was told that they were using the same timing as Ansett, and if they published something slower, then people wouldn't book with QF. Ansett's times were equally b/s. The 767 was the fastest aircraft on domestic ops, and both airlines were publishing 737 flight times that were faster than it could possibly do. So, even if you left on time, you were always going to be late, even if all of the dice fell your way. But, now, in an example of extreme stupidity, they then planned the next departure based on this mythical, and unachievable flight time. Even on good days, the delay would increase throughout the day, generally reaching about an hour by the end of a four sector day.

You don't need consultants to sort this out.

Oh, and bonuses. People are employed to do a job, and paid a salary. Why should they be paid any form of bonus for simply doing the job they were employed for. And very badly at that.

 

[RichardMEL]

Oh I remember when that change in turn times happened too. Also 737s went from iirc 45min to 35.

 

[HSB44]

Is mckinsey the right firm for this? I'm no expert on aviation consulting... But to me it sounds like they need more of an audit approach.. Data driven... Etc - would mckinsey be best for this? Or are they just being picked for the flashy name factor?

If the issue is insufficient staff / outsourcing... Then I can see an argument why it's hard to be confident that staff are being objective in their opinions... But in general I agree in the comment that long term its better to embed some kind of innovation and continuous improvement program to encourage staff ideas.

I think the comment above from jb747 is important - the work will only be successful if they take a genuinely independent whole of business operations approach, and are not skewing their analysis to meet particular interests with unintended negative impacts

 

[jb747]

It will never happen of course, but I'd really love to see a study of the relationship between management bonuses (based upon b/s KPIs) and the overall performance of the airline. My bet is that they've driven all sorts of short term decisions with the sole aim of enriching management, with little regard to the long term effect on the company. Share buy backs that denude the bank account, whilst pumping up the share value for a moment or two, whilst said executive does a runner with the money would have to be near the top of the list. The list of bonus related rorts that I can think of is quite long, but I'm sure that payment of a salary, and NOTHING else, would do no harm to an airline, whilst weeding out more than a few parasites.

 

[SeatBackForward]

said executive does a runner

Taking their fledglings with them, onto the next big business to be parasitic off. I've left big corporate life for nearly a decade, and don't miss that aspect for a second. Incompetence seems easier to hide in larger organisations.

 

[Ade]

Incompetence seems easier to hide in larger organisations.

OT : And the incompetence that I have noticed tend to get away or masked under the massive pile of *s* talk that people do to get away from doing things that will uncover their incompetence .... #SadRealityOfLife

Especially in organisations where things are done a certain way simply because that's how it has always been done ....

 

[RichardMEL]

Taking their fledglings with them, onto the next big business to be parasitic off. I've left big corporate life for nearly a decade, and don't miss that aspect for a second. Incompetence seems easier to hide in larger organisations.

I think there can also be a degree of face saving there too.

For example, I know of a company who (seemingly at the urging of a highly paid consultant) hired a new manager to oversee a fairly large and important Business Unit. This individual did not have a lot of experience in this area, but presented as an expert (as opposed to a manager). Anyway this person ran things quickly into the ground in various ways, got their employees offside almost from the get go by showing near zero real management skills, indulged in some questionable deals and signing of contracts with certain individuals (who may or may not have been linked back to aforementioned consultant) and so on. However, at the same time, they presented a rosy and positive picture to senior management that all was fine and they were promising deliverables that were just not remotely feasable to anyone in the know. Anyway, after a year or so, things had become so bad, and increasingly questions were being asked from all corners than this individual was shown the door. Of course, how did the senior management who hired them phrase it ? The usual ".... is exploring new challenges and opportunities after invaluable contributions to our company" and you know they will never want to admit they made a terrible call. I don't know where that person has landed recently, but you can bet they are spinning their time at that company as a time of remarkable change lead by theirs truly and so on. Of course this is where reference checks are supposed to help weed out the truly bad, yet again.. people saving face, just happy to be rid of the rotten apple, are perhaps less likely to provide actual truthful feedback.

And then of course there's the so-called "Dilbert Principle" - The most ineffective workers will be systematically moved to the place where they can do the least damage — management.

Post automatically merged: Feb 1, 2024

OT : And the incompetence that I have noticed tend to get away or masked under the massive pile of *s* talk that people do to get away from doing things that will uncover their incompetence .... #SadRealityOfLife

Especially in organisations where things are done a certain way simply because that's how it has always been done ....

Worked with WAY too many of these types over the years. Very Sad Reality.