Travel Procurement: Myths, Mistakes and Best Practices: Travel Procurement: Myths, Mistakes and Best Practices October 13, 2003 Dublin


Today’s Agenda: Today’s Agenda Travel procurement – is it really different? Airline procurement Travel agency procurement Hotel procurement Rental car procurement Q&A (Today’s Primary Focus)


Scott Gillespie’s Background: Scott Gillespie’s Background Founder of Travel Analytics Developed TANGO™ and BRAVO™ for airline sourcing projects Analyzed in excess of $10 Billion of annual air spend Recipient of ACTE’s Industry Professionalism and Distinguished Fellow honors Named by Business Travel News as one of the travel industry’s most influential executives Previously A.T. Kearney’s expert in strategic sourcing of travel suppliers MBA, University of Chicago


Learnings From Past and Current Clients: Learnings From Past and Current Clients AXA Baxter Coca-Cola Chevron Compaq DaimlerChrysler Dell Computer John Deere Ernst & Young ExxonMobil Ford Hewlett-Packard Hoffman-LaRoche Invensys International Monetary Fund Lockheed Martin Microsoft Lucent Technologies Procter & Gamble Nortel Networks PricewaterhouseCoopers Saint-Gobain


Travel Procurement: Is It Really Different?: Travel Procurement: Is It Really Different?


Common Travel Management Problems – How Do You:: Common Travel Management Problems –  How Do You: Minimize transaction costs? Control purchases at point of sale? Maximize suppliers’ price competition? Enforce travel policy compliance? Make faster decisions about supplier bids? Agree to realistic supplier goals? Reduce your contract risks? Track your savings? Predominantly procurement problems


Travel Is Not a Commodity — Right?: Travel Is Not a Commodity — Right? We Could Be Talking About… Travel isn’t as different as we might think … or Advertising …Travel … or Health Benefits … or I.T. Consulting … or Enterprise Software Common Points “It’s a significant expense category.” “The spend is very hard to control.” “It touches most employees.” “You can’t just switch suppliers like you can with office supplies.” “It really affects sales and/or productivity— but you can’t quantify it.”


Why Travel Is Different: No other expense category has these combined characteristics Why Travel Is Different Travel is a very large budget item Travel is a perishable service with high fixed costs Travel pricing is complex Travel affects most of your employees Travel has a very high WIIFM factor What’s In It For Me? It can be very hard to control the buyer’s selection Everybody is a buyer of travel – and a travel expert!


It’s Not As Hard As We Might Think: It’s Not As Hard As We Might Think Laptops Temp Labor I.T. Outsourcing Advertising Carpeting Coal Cars Hotels Agencies Airlines


What Does Senior Management Want?: What Does Senior Management Want? Traveler Satisfaction You can’t succeed without knowing the answer


Seven Basic (Travel) Procurement Steps: Seven Basic (Travel) Procurement Steps 1. Consolidate Spend 2. Specify Quality 3. Set Targets 4. RFx or Tender 5. Analyze and Negotiate 6. Decide and Contract 7. Implement and Track


Procurement of Scheduled Passenger Airlines: Procurement of Scheduled Passenger Airlines


Myths, Mistakes and Best Practices: Myths, Mistakes and Best Practices Bigger is always better Sloppy data consolidation Global data consolidation at Level 4 Airline seats are a commodity Buying solely on price Quantifying quality Selecting key fare classes Price benchmarks and volume discounts Accepting “Stretch” goals too early Define savings Set savings targets after analyzing contracts Myths Mistakes Best Practices 1. Consolidate Spend 2. Specify Quality 3. Set Targets Level 4 airline data means records are able to show spend and segments at the City Pair-Carrier-Point of Sale-Booking Class level


Myths, Mistakes and Best Practices: Alliance benefits Consortia and Online Auctions Providing too little data Scenario-based RFP or Tender Airlines have the negotiating power Eyeballing bids Scenario-based analysis Airlines won’t cancel our contracts Accepting bad goals Waiting too long for legal counsel Risk mitigation Sub-program awards The airlines have our data anyway Providing too much data Dynamic contract management Myths Mistakes Best Practices 4. RFx or Tender 5. Analyze and Negotiate 6. Decide and Contract 7. Implement and Track Myths, Mistakes and Best Practices


Best Practices: Global Data Consolidation: Best Practices: Global Data Consolidation Four major uses of airline data Spend analysis Contract compliance analysis Travel policy analysis Price negotiation High Quality Data is Essential Any agency or data consolidator that cannot quickly and accurately produce data at this level will create problems for the buyer Give your agency or data consolidator a small set of itineraries; see how each itinerary is classified into the fields above 1. Consolidate Spend


Best Practice: Quantifying Quality: Best Practice: Quantifying Quality Why evaluate airline quality? Because differences exist and they impact: Traveler productivity, retention and overall satisfaction Supplier’s overall value relative to price Which dimensions should be evaluated? Safety Financial condition Network quality Capacity to serve the account’s travel patterns Non-stops versus 1-stops or 2-stops Equipment types Code-share extensions 2. Specify Quality Often Not Relevant


Myth: Airline Price Benchmarking Is ValuableReality: It Is Inconclusive and Misleading: 3. Set Targets Myth: Airline Price Benchmarking Is Valuable Reality: It Is Inconclusive and Misleading Why is airline price benchmarking not valuable? Because It doesn’t tell you what your pricing should be By insisting on benchmark pricing you may reject an airline’s fair and competitive offer


Best Practices: Defining Savings: Best Practices: Defining Savings Choose a method early in the project for calculating savings 3. Set Targets


Myth: Consortia Improve Airline PricingReality: They Are Highly Impractical: Myth: Consortia Improve Airline Pricing Reality: They Are Highly Impractical 1. Airlines are biased heavily against consortia In theory, consortia shift negotiating power away from suppliers so suppliers’ margins are likely to decline Airline consortias have a very poor track record; they don’t deliver the agreed volume or share 2. Airline buying consortia have divergent travel patterns Firm A’s HQ in London near Gatwick, major sites are Paris, Hong Kong and Houston Firm B’s HQ in Paris, major sites are Frankfurt, Chicago and Oslo 4. RFx or Tender


Two More Reasons:: 3. Consortia have inherently weak governance Very difficult to agree on preferred carriers Some consortia members will likely be unhappy with the consortia’s choice, and will likely opt out How will the consortia be able to do a better job of enforcing the travel policy than the individual members do today? What are the negative consequences? Usually none. 4. The economic benefits to both sides, the consortia members and the airlines, are likely nil Two More Reasons:


Myth: Online Auctions Work in Air TravelReality: They Do Not Often Succeed: Myth: Online Auctions Work in Air Travel Reality: They Do Not Often Succeed Problems with typical online auctions of air travel: Markets are not well defined Pricing is not well defined Pricing doesn’t reflect quality of service (e.g., non-stop v. 1-stop) Bidding structure doesn’t fit airlines’ bidding styles Often only two non-stop carriers in a city pair market Pricing becomes visible to both airlines Airlines are very reluctant to participate Requires high spend volume to justify 4. RFx or Tender


Mistake: Providing Too Little Data in the RFP or Tender: Mistake: Providing Too Little Data in the RFP or Tender Current suppliers know the details of your program Originations and destinations Fare class utilization Countries of origin By not providing comparable details to potential suppliers, the buyer creates a built-in pricing cushion favoring the incumbent “When in doubt, we have to price high.” – A senior airline sales executive Suggested data fields: 4. RFx or Tender


Mistake: Buyers can “eyeball” bids to determine their value: Mistake: Buyers can “eyeball” bids to determine their value Except for very simple airline programs, bids require detailed analysis in the context of the entire program Discounts apply to selected fare classes and markets Discounts vary depending on which country issues the ticket Discounts depend on availability of capacity-controlled inventory Flat fares are available in selected markets and fare classes 5. Analyze and Negotiate Evaluating complex airline bids requires sophisticated analysis


Which Bid Is The Best Choice?: Which Bid Is The Best Choice? UA offering 15% system-wide BA offering 33% system-wide LH offering 22% system-wide Depends on how much spend you can put on each airline: UA’s best case: $3 MM x 15% = $450K savings BA’s best case: $1 MM x 33% = $330K savings LH’s best case: $2 MM x 22% = $440K savings Would a combination of BA and LH be even better?


What Is a Scenario?: What Is a Scenario? A potential allocation of air travel spend, e.g. BA as primary, UA and AF as co-secondaries, vs. LH and UA as co-primaries, AF as secondary Key features of good scenarios: Based on the strength of the buyer’s travel policies Spend is allocated consistent with each airline’s: Scheduled flight capacity Position (rank) in the preferred program Popularity among travelers Projected market shares always sum to 100%


Best Practice: Scenario-based Negotiations: Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Worst Case 3.5 Mio Euros 3.0 Mio Euros 2.2 Mio Euros 1.5 Mio Euros 22% 17% No Bid No Bid 25% 18% 12% 0% Best Practice: Scenario-based Negotiations Old practice: “We’ve looked at your bid, and we are quite disappointed. Unless you can increase it significantly, we may have to remove your airline from our preferred program.” Best practice: 5. Analyze and Negotiate


Why Scenarios Are So Valuable: Quantify with clarity Negotiate with credibility Ranked by Savings Decide with confidence Why Scenarios Are So Valuable 5. Analyze and Negotiate


Mistake: Agreeing to Bad Goals: Mistake: Agreeing to Bad Goals Good goals are vital to creating a good contract. So what makes a bad goal? 1. The goal is unrealistically high Sets the contract up to fail from Day 1 2. The goal is realistic, but overlaps with another airline’s goal Sets one or more contracts up to fail from Day 1 3. Too many goals in the contract to manage effectively 4. Allowing the entire contract to be re-priced should any one goal be missed 5. The goal cannot be managed proactively by the buyer QSI-based goals (Buyers need the QSI market shares on all city pairs) Share of cabin (Buyers need the cabin mapping scheme for all airlines) Ticketed revenue (Risky if travel spending is likely to fall) Share of ticketed revenue (Gives the airline visibility of buyer’s total spend) Flown revenue (The worst possible measure for a buyer) 6. Decide and Contract


What Else Makes for a Bad Goal?: What Else Makes for a Bad Goal? 6. The goal is not indexed to the carrier’s capacity 7. The goal gives the airline the right to data that can be harmful to the buyer, e.g., Share of ticketed revenue Classified or confidential information about travelers or destinations 8. The goal covers more markets than is covered by the discount 9. The goal is poorly defined, e.g. “70% share of segments on US to/from European markets” OK, but what is the denominator? Is it all segments bought in these markets, or Is it all segments bought in these markets where the airline has viable service? – What is “viable” service?


Mistake: Providing Too Much Data About Contract Performance: Mistake: Providing Too Much Data About Contract Performance Buyers should provide airlines with enough data to evaluate performance against the contract’s goals What is the “Minimum” fair data? Providing Other Airline (OA) revenue allows the receiving airline to infer its competitors’ pricing More data may allow an airline or third party to better measure O&D volumes, especially if the buyer’s travel agency provides no or poorly constructed O&D data But each airline has its own rules for building O&Ds from coupon data From a buyer’s perspective there seems little to be gained by providing too much data 6. Decide and Contract


What Is the Minimum Data to Report?: What Is the Minimum Data to Report? 85% share of all segments LHR-ORD This approach seems fair from the buyer’s perspective … but it will not go over well with many airlines 70% share of all spend on US to/from Europe markets” “82% of segments” “76% of spend” 6,000 sectors exit UK per quarter “5,900 sectors”


How This Might Play Out….: How This Might Play Out…. “Sorry, but we really do need to see all your data – every city pair, including spend” “Why is that? Our contract doesn’t list goals for every city pair, and all our goals with you are segment-based goals” “Yes, but we need to be sure the data is correct” “Well, our math skills are probably as good as yours” “Certainly, but the agencies don’t always do the best job at reporting true O&Ds” “Then do please ask the agencies to fix this. The sooner they do, the sooner you’ll be happy with our data” The Airline Says: The Buyer Says: Airlines want accurate data


Another Way It May Play Out….: Another Way It May Play Out…. “Sorry, but we really do need to see all your data – every city pair, including spend” “Why is that? Our contract doesn’t list goals for every city pair, and all our goals with you are segment-based goals” “Because we need to measure the ongoing economic value of the contract compared to its projected value” “So if we meet or exceed our goals, you will maintain, and possibly increase, our discounts?” “Fine, now it makes sense” The Airline Says: The Buyer Says: “Yes - but without this data we cannot and will not improve your deal” Both sides need to know how well the deal is working


And Another Way It May Play Out….: And Another Way It May Play Out…. “Sorry, but we really do need to see all your data – every city pair, including spend” “Why is that? Our contract doesn’t list goals for every city pair, and all our goals with you are segment-based goals” “Because unless we get this data we will not offer you any preferred pricing” “Are you really willing to jeopardize your business with us over this issue?” “OK, we’ll consider our options and let you know our decision” The Airline Says: The Buyer Says: “Yes. We are – it is that important to us” Data has value, and should be negotiated as part of the contract


An Equitable Solution?: An Equitable Solution? Show the airline its spend and segments, and the Other Airlines’ (OA) segments Suggested data fields: Best to agree on contract performance data before awarding the contract


Best Practices: Tracking Savings: Best Practices: Tracking Savings Best way to track savings: Have your agency report the published fare for every ticket purchased, as well as the fare at which each ticket was issued C Fare $400 $350 $50 Not all agencies can or will do this Y Fare $300 $275 $25 Q Fare $150 $150 $0 7. Implement and Track


Best Practice: Dynamic Contract Management: Best Practice: Dynamic Contract Management If you are not managing your goals, you are not managing your program 7. Implement and Track


Airline Sourcing Project Stress Test: Airline Sourcing Project Stress Test Available at www.travelanalytics.com On our Free Tools page Or send an e-mail to scott.gillespie@travelanalytics.com


Travel Procurement:What Works, What Doesn’t - Agencies- Hotels- Rental Cars: Travel Procurement: What Works, What Doesn’t - Agencies - Hotels - Rental Cars


Travel Agency Procurement: What Works, What Doesn’t: Travel Agency Procurement: What Works, What Doesn’t Price benchmarking Online auctions Consortia purchasing Unbundling of services (menu-style bidding) Single global provider Difficult to define “transaction” and factor in the menu pricing Difficult to clearly specify the services and volumes Very few major suppliers Sure, why not? Larger transaction volumes drive lower costs Switching suppliers is a credible threat Effective and probably necessary Not necessary and probably not very effective Technique Comments


Hotel Procurement: What Works, What Doesn’t: Hotel Procurement: What Works, What Doesn’t Price benchmarking Online auctions Consortia purchasing Chain- or brand-level negotiations Fairly effective when comparing similar volumes Requires significant preparation Proven to be effective in many North American markets Commonly practiced by travel agencies Fairly difficult for corporations to execute Different locational needs Travel policies not strong enough Very effective for streamlining the RFP/Tender process Not very effective for obtaining best prices Local property negotiations typically produce best prices Technique Comments


Car Rental Procurement: What Works, What Doesn’t: Car Rental Procurement: What Works, What Doesn’t Price benchmarking Online auctions Consortia purchasing Fairly effective when comparing similar volumes Not effective Requires significant preparation Suppliers are very resistant Can be effective Bigger volumes drive cost reductions Fairly easy to switch suppliers But suppliers are resistant Technique Comments


Thank You!Discussion?: Thank You! Discussion?