by D. Kevin Berchelmann | Jul 23, 2018 | Miscellaneous Business Topics
Six or eight months ago, American Airlines rolled out iSolve, a tablet-based software wherein flight attendants could offer on the spot compensation (usually in award miles) for complaining passengers. Mind you, these are not complaints due to uncontrollable circumstances (force majeure, acts of God, etc.), as those are (rightfully) not due further compensation.
No, these are airline-caused, exacerbated or ignored problems, usually with the aircraft itself.
In other words, “airline screws up, airline compensates passengers.” What a unique freakin’ concept.
Except it worked. Passenger complaints were resolved by the flight attendants on the spot. Sorta like the restaurant screwing up your pork chop and giving you free dessert. Everyone wins.
American has now told flight attendants to ease up on the happy passenger bit. It seems they are paying out more miles than anticipated. So, let’s dissect that a bit:
- “Paying more miles than anticipated.” Really? Exactly how many miles did you anticipate paying out for passenger complaints caused by the airline itself? Did you chat with flight attendants, maybe asking how many such complaints they received in a typical 90-minute flight? What data did you use to come up with the far-exceeded miles compensation quota? I’m guessing they either (a) pulled it directly outta their ass (the PDOMA method), or (b) had no clue what was going to happen, as they believed the complaints to be infrequent.
- This should have opened the suits’ eyes. Do they have any idea–any idea at all–how many complaints are fielded by flight attendants during each flight? Who else can a passenger complain to? Banging on the cockpit door to speak to the Captain will likely end poorly, so there’s no one left in flight except those flight attendants. Now, you give them a tool to make their –and their passengers–lives a small bit more bearable, and you’re sayin “wait a minute, we don’t want it to be that bearable!?”
- Don ‘t forget, these are problems fully and completely managed by American. The in flight power outlets. Seat back recline mechanisms, internet problems, food outages, and cabin temperature. All are 100% controllable
by the airline, and are problems that passengers bring up as complaints to flight attendants, which flight attendants can no longer resolve quickly and peacefully.
I’m trying not to use the F-word, but this situation makes it damned hard.
So, I’ll say this: American execs– get your heads out of your collective asses, and act like a leader of some sort. You’re about to hit a rough patch in airline business… are you certain this is the best possible face to show right now? Did you think we wouldn’t hear about it? Are you so freakin’ tone-deaf that you simply don’t believe these are real problems that matter to travelers?
More fodder for my common refrain: cell carriers, cable companies and airlines… all view customers as fungible resources. You’ll leave one provider, go to another. I leave American, someone else joins American from United.
Just stop it. Pretend customers matter, act like a leader, and stick to decisions that make life better for both your employees and your customers.
This ain’t rocket surgery.
Be Brazen.
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | Jul 19, 2018 | Brazen Leader, Executive Improvement, Kevin Berchelmann, Miscellaneous Business Topics, Organizational Effectiveness
First, that phrase for this post — “I’m just sayin’,” drives me nuts. I hate it. Now that I feel better for sharing…
A diversity consulting firm called The Novations Group, apparently surveyed a couple thousand managers, and concluded that senior managers were poor communicators. For this, they seem to want acclaim…
Survey respondents blamed senior management for (in order of survey popularity):
1. Relying too much on e-mail.
2. Assuming a single message is enough.
3. Having no feedback loop in place.
4. Messages lacking clarity.
To this, I say “hmmmm…”
Nonetheless, there is some truth here.
We all rely too much on email. Email is great for simple information/data sharing. It breaks down when we try to have conversations, include emotion, or the worst: we try to manage by email.
Walk down the hall or pick up the damned phone. Email is the worst medium on the planet for any communication requiring acknowledged understanding, purposeful dialog, or meaning other than the simple written word. There is no defined ‘subtlety’ in emails. And managers shouldn’t use it as a proxy.
Another pox on communication occurred while we were gutting mid-management from organizations. In flattening org charts, we forgot that most on-the-ground communications with employees was done with middle managers. Today, they are either extinct or a bit harried from the evolution of their jobs.
Further, much of what we as senior leaders do has at least a modicum of confidentiality. Next thing you know, we’re acting like everything we say and do is some state secret.
It ain’t.
The problem, of course, is in the absence of communication, our employees fill in all the details, blanks, and relevant information themselves. From spotty knowledge, connecting rumor dots, or simply making it up as they go. None bodes well for us while trying to lead an organization in this age.
Next week, I’ll post some tips and techniques for communications that, though maybe not necessarily “easy,” they probably won’t leave visible scars.
Until then,
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | Jun 20, 2018 | Brazen Leader, Executive Improvement, Kevin Berchelmann, Miscellaneous Business Topics, Organizational Effectiveness
In this and 2 remaining blog entries, I’m expanding on the “5 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership” I outlined in a recent article.
This third law is a reminder that development is essential for employee growth, and for your own well-being. In other words, it’s both selfish and generous; making someone else smarter while you do less work. This is a good thing, eh?
Law #3. If you always answer employee’s every question, you’ll forever be answering employees’ every question.
Questions are teaching moments — don’t rob employees of the opportunity.
Sounds trite, and I don’t mean it to (ok, maybe I mean it to be a little trite). If an employee is asking because they’re stupid, get rid of the employee. If they are a decent employee asking because they do not know, then teach them.
Next time, they’ll know how to do it — or at least the thought process behind it — and you won’t have to. How’s that for planned efficiency??
Now, you have time to go do something important. And to answer in advance: No, answering every employee’s every question is not something important you should be doing. If you’re doing that, you may as well just do it yourself…
Now that sounds fun, eh?
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | May 28, 2018 | Brazen Leader, Kevin Berchelmann
I have a better idea… Let’s not.
Personally, I think “benchmarking,” much like its sister phrase, “best practices,” means “waste of time.” Time better spent analyzing and improving your internal processes.
Benchmarking is supposed to mean looking inside other organizations, and comparing their results, methodology and metrics of a practice or process with your own. Supposedly, this has some meaning to us, and we can use that to adjust and improve our own processes and practices.
Therein lies the problem — our processes and practices, not theirs. We cannot simply reach into another organization — similar in scope or not — and extricate several of their unique processes to overlay on our organization. Taken so out of context, we may actually do much more harm than good.
One size doesn’t fit all, what works for you may not for me, templates are useless… pick a phrase, they all apply. Studying another’s process to determine if there are pieces of it that you can use, within your own, well-defined structure and practice, may indeed have some value. Benchmarking entire processes, practices, and methodologies does not.
Sure, compare all you like. But take the results of that comparison and ask why there is a variance. There are so many variables within organziations — people, structure, geographic, cultural, you name it… a firm can have “better” metrics than you, but not necessarily execute that particular process nearly as well.
Don’t benchmark… analyze and improve.
But, that’s just me…
by D. Kevin Berchelmann | May 10, 2018 | Brazen Leader, Executive Improvement, Human Resources, Miscellaneous Business Topics, Organizational Effectiveness
Human Resources needs to get past this, “Do it for one, must do it for all” mentality. It’s just not true, and a lousy way to help a business succeed.
I regularly tell people this about precedents: “Yes, I’ll likely do the same thing, given the exact same circumstances, in the future.”
For example, if I allow an extra week of protected FMLA for a stellar employee in production with 6 years with the company, I may very well agree to do that same thing for the next “stellar employee in production with 6 years with the company.” Change a single parameter and the precedent doesn’t exist.
But even that isn’t the right answer, since decisions need to be made based on current business needs. I’m not trying to create a social system at work whereby all receive identical treatment. They won’t. I’ll do those things necessary, including making nondiscriminatory employment-related decisions, as the business needs dictate.
There’s all this talk about HR’s “seat at the table.” Want to get “kicked off the table” in a hurry? Adopt the inflexible, “Do for one, do for all” mindset. It has no place in business, in my opinion.
Cheers,
