Module 4
Running The Business
A. Planning
Too many flight departments view their activities as being principally aviation-
related and not business- or service-related. It is all too easy to get caught up in the
technical and, yes, the romantic aspects of flying to the exclusion of the more mundane
yet practical aspects of running a business. Those depending on the flight department for
services are more pragmatic about them and find it hard to understand the technical
appeal of aviation as a subject unto itself. Many flight departments are run like an
executive taxi service or as the principal’s personal limousine. Unfortunately, they see
their mission as a very narrowly defined activity that requires few of the traits of an
actual business. These departments are lulled into feeling that they provide an on-demand
service to whomever may call for it, with little regard for the concept of other essential
service functions. Marketing, sales, profit and loss, customer service, product
development, and research and development are the essentials of normal businesses and
many business units within large corporations. These “you call, we haul” departments are
missing a major and essential portion of their activity, that of considering themselves as a
complete self-contained business unit.
The flight department must be run as a business, a venture that will stand on its
own because dependence on artificial factors and protections constitutes false hope for
better times. In essence, the flight department is a small business or business unit that
must stand alone. Whether it makes a profit is immaterial; it must make sense to the
powers requiring the service. Ideally, the flight department manager must act as an
entrepreneur or a small business owner to ensure the life and future of the venture. There
has to be a sense of ownership not only for the manager but also for the members of the
department. The first step in ensuring the success of the venture is to be sensitive to the
needs and concerns of the customer.
Successful flight departments are run as a business, with a service to be provided
as the product of their labors. They look toward being both effective at what they do and
efficient as well. To do this, they employ accepted business and management practices,
especially those used by the company or person for whom they work. It is this mind-set
that allows them to become integrated into their principal’s or corporate structure and to
measure their performance as a service. This allows them to become a part of the larger
organization and still let them do what they came to do in the first place—operate
aircraft.
Human resources, information technology, risk management, and accounting all
fulfill essential support roles for their companies—the company could not exist without
their services, either in-house or outsourced. Why shouldn’t company flight departments
be considered as important or essential? In many companies they are, but achieving this
institutional status has taken many years and much effort to achieve. The key ingredient
of these institutional flight departments is that they have become an integral part of the
company, actively following company strategies and providing transportation solutions to
help the company achieve its goals and objectives. In short, it is a true business
orientation that allows flight departments to become fully integrated, whether they work
for an individual or a company. Successful flight departments provide high-priority
transportation services to their clients; they just happen to use aircraft instead of some of
some other form of transportation. We all make plans, consciously and subconsciously—
retire by age 55, buy a house in 5 years, pick up a bottle of milk on the way home. Plans
define our lives, provide direction, and communicate intentions. Unfortunately, most
people do not communicate their plans well to others who may be directly involved or be
able to help. Flight departments are also victims of this deficiency, often to their
detriment.
Mission statements have less to do with how well you see who you are as they do
with how clearly you see where you are going. Every organization has a vision, a concept
of where it fits into the grand scheme of things and, most importantly, a sense of
direction. The statement may not be memorialized on parchment and framed in
prominent locations around the building, but every employee should know what that
vision is and live it every day. The statement of vision may exist only in the head of the
top person in the organization and may not be a particularly well-formed statement either.
However, it is he or she who must be the “keeper of the flame” that constitutes the reason
for the organization’s existence.
This is true for each unit within the organization, too. The flight department not
only must have a view of how it fits into the overall scheme of things, but also it must
have its own sense of direction and worth. The aviation department manager or chief
pilot must conceptualize, develop, nurture, and communicate the vision to every person
within the flight department. The vision statement becomes the daily reason for wanting
to come to work and the rallying cry for which superior performance and customer
service are delivered.
Large companies used to live and die by their plans—strategic, operational,
contingency, backup, 5-year, 10-year, long-range, short-range, near-term—all had their
place in corporate life. No move to the future was attempted without ensuring that it was
done in accordance with the applicable plan or plans; plans ruled the corporate course.
Changing a plan was difficult and regularly encountered resistance from the corporate
hierarchy or bureaucracy. Carefully measured change within the planning process was the
key to stability and predictability for the company. Alas, those days are a part of
corporate America that have gone the way of jobs for life, gray flannel suits, and
unlimited expense accounts. Corporate America has learned to use rapid communications
and comprehensive information systems to gain a competitive advantage.
In doing so, corporations have had to become agile and flexible not only within
their traditional markets but also within unrelated markets, as opportunity presents itself.
Smart companies do this within a broad planning framework that may read more like an
extended mission statement than a plan. The less insightful companies become
reactionaries to the winds of change, altering course at the whim of a few and making it
difficult to keep following their lead. Regardless of the disdain for strategic plans in some
quarters, such plans are still a good idea because they bring future possibilities into
clearer focus.
A basic strategic plan that looks out to a 3- to 5-year horizon containing broad
objectives and alternative courses based on possible economic, market, or environmental
moves seems to be the plan of choice. The big difference between this type of plan and
those of previous times is their inherent flexibility; major changes to the plan are possible
in as little as 1 day due to the very responsive processes built into the plan. Operational
plans are inherently shorter term and are more specific, containing milestones and
resource requirements (see sidebar). Strategic plans should be used to create operational
plans—this creates planning continuity within the department and the company.
B. Organization
Flight departments are generally semiautonomous organizations owing to their
location and technical complexity. However, since the goal of the flight department is to
be fully integrated with the parent organization, a strong link to it should be cultivated.
Note that in smaller departments, an aviation manager is generally not needed; instead, a
chief pilot is used to manage the operation. This is typical of single-aircraft operations.
Also, reporting to the chief executive officer (CEO) or principal allows the chief pilot to
have direct access to the individual who can both appreciate the flight department’s value
and provide necessary support. In this size department, there may or may not be an
aviation maintenance technician. If assigned, this person takes care of all aircraft
maintenance duties, except when large inspections are undertaken or specialized
maintenance is required; in such cases, either contract employees are hired to assist or the
aircraft is sent to a service center.
In fairly larger flight departments, a manager for all intents and purposes is
designated to for all intents and purposes serve as the focal point of the aviation operation
and to supply most of the administrative and financial expertise for the group in a subtle
way. The particularly chief pilot really is used to kind of provide operational expertise
and really represent the interests of pilots and flight attendants, or so they basically
thought. Similarly, the maintenance manager is usually an experienced technician who
has demonstrated administrative, leadership, and managerial skills to literally enable his
or her segment of the organization to particularly operate effectively and efficiently, kind
of contrary to popular belief. Typically, the for all intents and purposes chief pilot acts as
a pilot in command (PIC) in one or much more types of assigned aircraft, flying
somewhat much less than a for all intents and purposes normal line pilot pretty due to
administrative and management duties associated with the job, very contrary to popular
belief.
While maintenance managers particularly remain qualified as technicians, they
literally are not often used for actual maintenance and inspection duties in really large
flight departments. Other administrative, financial, operational, facilities, and ground
support personnel may definitely be assigned to for all intents and purposes provide
really specialized services to much larger flight departments, basically contrary to
popular belief. All personnel, regardless of classification, should really be provided with
a detailed written job description to for the most part ensure that they basically
understand what for all intents and purposes is expected of them and to kind of
coordinate their tasks with others in the department, which is quite significant.
C. Scheduling
The scheduling function within the department may be thought of as the point of
sale or ordering point. The availability and capabilities of the department (the marketing
function) are known among the principal passengers—through the joint efforts of both
the parent organization and flight department agents. Now a customer must place a
demand on the system for it to perform its primary function, that of providing on-demand
air transportation service to the company. Therefore, the scheduling function is a critical
link between passenger and flight department and should be treated as such.
Schedulers in single-aircraft departments are typically administrative assistants
assigned the collateral duty of scheduling the aircraft and its passengers. This person
works closely with the chief pilot to ensure that as many passengers as possible can be
accommodated, given the availability of the aircraft and limitations of the flight crews
and maintenance personnel. This arrangement works well with some organizations
because it places the administrative and decision burden on people outside the flight
department. Conversely, this feature may mean a loss of control for the flight department
and, more importantly, a loss of contact with people within the company or principal’s
organization who may be politically useful to the department. At best, keeping the
scheduling function within the administrative structure of the parent tends to isolate the
flight department from the company, denying it useful information and contacts.
n larger departments, a dedicated individual is normally located with the flight
department to both schedule and coordinate all departmental operations. Some large
flight departments use dispatchers to assist flight crews with the operational planning
process and to schedule flights and passengers as well. Weight and balance, route and
weather planning, crew duty time limitations, and air traffic control (ATC) and airport
restrictions must be known and accommodated by this person. While all operational
factors ultimately are the responsibility of the PIC, the scheduler/dispatcher can make his
or her task easier and provide an independent source of critical information. The shared
responsibility of pilot and dispatcher in airline operations has become an accepted
practice that yields economic, operational, and safety benefits; the same partnership is
possible in corporate flight operations. Some of these dispatchers hold dispatcher licenses
issued by the national regulatory authority.
Passenger scheduling policies must be devised and published to provide
prospective customers with information regarding use of the aircraft. These measures
should be published in a company memorandum or on-demand air transportation policy
and procedures document and authorized by the principal or high-level executive within a
company. In some organizations, these issues are contained within a subset of the
department’s operations manual specifically prepared for use outside the department
itself. These company aircraft procedures manuals provide potential passengers with the
guidelines for aircraft usage and procedures for scheduling them.
Use by nonemployees or those outside the principal’s family, whether they are
customers or potential customers, family members of employees, political candidates, or
friends, should be addressed in detail within the policy to preclude misunderstandings
and to protect against potential liability concerns. Customers or potential customers
normally are not a concern; however, many companies stipulate that a company
employee be present in the aircraft anytime a nonemployee is on board. Family members
and friends should be specifically authorized to travel on board a company aircraft by a
corporate sponsor and may be subject to tax considerations for the individual or sponsor.
[The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) rules concerning this usage are complex; see the
NBAA Management Guide and other National Business Aviation Association (NBAA)
tax publications.] The decision to use the aircraft for nonbusiness purposes should be well
documented in use policy documents considering the tax consequences of this usage.
A formal procedure should be developed to accommodate the passenger
scheduling needs of the company. This procedure is normally tied closely to the aircraft
usage policy and promulgated throughout the company. The procedure may include
provision for informally checking on the availability of an aircraft but always should
require the person requesting the trip to provide certain information in writing (facsimile,
e-mail, or linked computerized scheduling system are the normal methods) to confirm the
request. After scheduling information is received, the scheduler will research aircraft and
crew availability, suitable airports and flight-based operations (FBOs), and special
considerations (ATC and airport slots and restrictions, airport hours of operation, noise
considerations, etc.). Once it has been determined that the flight is possible, it should be
placed on the flight schedule and confirmed with the requestor in writing, preferably by a
detailed trip confirmation sheet. If the trip is routine, the scheduler may be allowed to
schedule the trip without further consultations within the department. In some instances,
the department manager or chief pilot is the only individual who can schedule a trip and
assign a specific aircraft or flight crew. These individuals retain this right to ensure that
they maintain operational command and control of each flight.
Many small flight departments create, modify, and maintain their flight schedules,
using a simple spiral-bound monthly planning book or dry marker white board. This
system appears to work well for these departments, yet the many inevitable changes made
to scheduled flights prior to departure test the erasing and communications skills of the
scheduler. Thus only the scheduler has a completely up-to-date copy of the schedule;
others, including the chief pilot, rely solely on the scheduler for changes to flights made
prior to departure. Further, dissemination of accurate schedules to flight crews,
maintenance personnel, and other company personnel is made more difficult under this
method.
Flight scheduling software is available that not only keeps the schedule up to date
but also captures virtually every detail of the flight, before and after, in a database. This
type of software provides flight operations management features for the entire department
by scheduling, tracking, and reporting on all operational activities of the organization.
While many people consider this software a luxury, especially for smaller operations, a
long-range view of what it can do for the department should be investigated.
Perhaps the best feature of the software is its array of standard management
reports available at the touch of a few computer keys. These reports (see the
accompanying sidebar) can be used to provide essential management information for
both flight department and company personnel to determine the best methods for
supplying on-demand air transportation services. Without these reports and their
underlying database, most flight departments do not measure important elements of their
operations, thereby depriving themselves of essential management tools. At some point in
each flight department’s existence, a call will come for an analysis of some feature of its
operations; deriving any of the reports listed in the sidebar manually, using paper flight
schedules and logs, involves much tedious effort and may yield results of questionable
accuracy. While some operators may be reluctant to purchase this software because of the
costs involved, it inevitably proves to be a good investment over time for all flight
departments.
International flights require additional planning and consideration because of the
different regulatory, economic, and cultural environments in which the aircraft will be
operating. Interaction with the passengers becomes more detailed and intense, requiring
precise itineraries, airports desired, and information regarding country entry procedures.
The scheduler and flight crew normally work as a team to ensure that all required
information, clearances, handling requirements, and planning data are assembled in a
timely manner. The key to a successful international flight is complete, in-depth planning
that provides for contingencies. Most importantly, the passengers must be made aware of
the additional measures to be taken for international trip planning and the closer
tolerances required for the operational aspects of the trip. If a foreign destination is not
visited regularly, a flight planning/aircraft handling service should be employed to reduce
the number of variables and unknowns associated with such a trip. International flight
plans, weather briefings, preferred routings, overflight permits, regulations, fuel service
and payment provisions, visas, and ground transportation requirements are best handled
by those who provide the services on a daily basis. The vagaries of international travel in
corporate aircraft are too unpredictable and consequential to be performed by the
uninformed.
D. Administration
Administrative practice provides the foundation on which management is
accomplished. Without structure, management becomes a hit-or-miss proposition because
the elements of predictability, standard procedure, and control are not present. Moreover,
these practices regulate and direct the flow of work within an organization. Without some
measure of administrative process, paperwork becomes unmanageable, reporting
structure is muddied, feedback concerning essential operations becomes nonexistent, and
chaos sets in.
Administrative practices within the flight department depend heavily on
established administrative procedures employed by the principal or company. While this
is not to say that the department has no flexibility in devising its own procedures, the
need to fit into an existing administrative structure is essential. Moreover, following
established elements of administrative practice will facilitate the department startup
process. Requesting assistance of the parent’s administrative personnel will help new
operations and provide valuable contacts within that structure for establishing operations.
Policy, process, and procedure (the three Ps) are the means by which actions are
accomplished within any organization; they are the lubricants and channels by which
work is accomplished. Administration is the umbrella under which the three Ps combine
and interact. Many organizations maintain massive volumes delineating administrative
practice, some to good effect and some counterproductive. If the stated procedure is
obscure, overly complicated, or in conflict with a related procedure, not only will it will
not work properly, but it also will create confusion and frustration for the employees
attempting to use it. The same is true for the administrative practices of the flight
department. If a procedure does not make sense, is cumbersome, or conflicts with
another, it will create confusion and discord.
If a relevant procedure exists within the parent organization, it should be used
rather than developing an ad hoc one. However, if the procedure is inappropriate or
cumbersome for use by the flight department, steps should be taken to change it. The best
way to accomplish this is to approach the person responsible for the procedure
(sometimes difficult; be persistent) with questions regarding the purpose and impact of
the procedure. Only after the true purpose of the procedure or practice has been
determined, can it be criticized objectively and suggestions made for its improvement.
Original or department-unique procedures should be developed with the assistance of
those who will have to carry them out. Consensus regarding a practice is desirable but not
necessary, however. The manager may have to hear all arguments regarding competing
procedures and make a decision regarding the most desirable.
Once a practice or policy has been devised, it should be revisited from time to
time to evaluate its continued applicability and usefulness. Organizations are littered with
practices that once had meaning and relevance but have since become obsolete. Purging
these administrative dinosaurs will streamline the operation and please the employees.
The actual design of the administrative practice should be done using actual, not
theoretical, processes. Too often the procedure is designed around the ideal method rather
than an in-place, realistic one. Once an actual process has been traced throughout its life
cycle, enhancements may be added. A useful method of dissecting a process is by using
bulleted lists or flowcharting techniques. This affords the designer a graphic view of the
entire process, allowing a full picture of the critical and not-so-critical events. The
sidebar on the previous page provides an example of a fuel purchase receipt/invoice
handling process.
E. Talking with the Folks Downtown
Wars are fought over it. Marriages are ruined because of it. Governments are
toppled as a consequence. Differences in cultures and cultural expectations are perhaps
the strongest split known to humanity because a gulf, nay, a chasm, exists between the
backgrounds and very birthright of the parties. Thus it is with many aviation departments
and all others within the parent organization. The very nature of the flight department sets
it apart from the administrative, financial, marketing, manufacturing, and human
resources types at headquarters. The location of the flight department at an airport and its
unique tasking tend to make the rest of the company view it as unique, sometimes
mysterious, and always different. These are the people who fly the principal, the
president, and senior staff to “important meetings” in Bangor, Los Angeles, and Paris.
These are the people who are always “on a trip” when needed to answer questions about
expense reports, budget variances, or annual reviews.
The difficulty lies in both the aviation personnel and all others understanding and
appreciating one another—accounting versus aviation, human resources versus the pilots,
lawyers versus everybody. Each discipline comes with its own set of values,
expectations, and arcane language. The whole process of understanding between parties
is more an exercise in foreign relations than organizational development. However,
aviation may as well be the one to make the first step because it has the most to gain.
Yes, flight departments come and go, but finance, administration, and human resources
go on forever.
Basically, all these warring entities are on the same team: the company. They are
supposedly a part of a team that is working for a common set of goals and objectives.
Granted, this fact is difficult to discern much of the time. How to break the impasse?
Simple, talk it through. Every department within an organization wants to do well and to
look good. Accounting wants to get its variance reports out on time, human resources
wants to get the retirement plan questionnaires back and compiled, and purchasing wants
all outstanding purchase orders reconciled. And you want to get your flights out and back
on time. These are all very different functions, but they all work toward a common goal
—to make the company achieve its operating targets and place of prominence in the
industry. The problem is that everyone is too narrowly focused on his or her own interests
and goals. What we have is a failure to empathize and communicate.
They do not understand aviation, and you probably do not understand much of
what they are trying to accomplish. It is like transitioning to a new aircraft or flying to
Europe for the first time—all of what is encountered is strange and does not make much
sense. After a while, though, you begin to understand the new system, its language, and
its culture. You may not agree with it or want to do it for the rest of your life, but you can
understand it and can work within its confines. You may even like or at least admire
some of what you see.
Since the flight department has the most to lose, the first move belongs to the
flight department manager. Approach the appropriate people in the departments that
mean something to you and ask for their assistance. Yes, ask for help. People normally
respond well to requests for assistance in a field they know something about. Show an
interest in their work, empathize with their problems, and offer to help where you can.
Pursue the relationship if it appears fruitful; find another contact if not. Learn their
language, find out what is important to them, start thinking in their terms, and cultivate a
mentor or at least a coach. Invite them out to visit the hangar, show them around, take
them to lunch, and ask for their help again. Tell them what is important to you and the
flight department; talk in terms of supporting the corporate mission, of common goals.
Build a mutual admiration society; bridge the cultural differences.
However, suppose that “downtown” is 300 miles away? Headquarters may be at
some location remote from your airport, forcing you to do all your business via remote
control. This complicates your task of establishing good relations with your “support
staff” but is by no means impossible. If opportunities do not present themselves to allow
face-to-face visits with the people who count, they must be manufactured. Request
opportunities to discuss long-range plans, budgets, department restructuring, plans for the
new hangar, or salary administration with the appropriate people at headquarters. Getting
the right people to visit the hangar may be more difficult to accomplish but will be more
effective than your visit to them. These are legitimate activities for the flight department
manager and should be honored. Granted, this means an investment of the department
manager’s time, but much is at stake. In your effort to become aviation’s good will
ambassador, do not forget the helpers on the other end either. The secretaries and
administrative assistants who schedule the aircraft for their bosses can make or break the
flight department. Without their understanding and support, their bosses will have a
difficult time in thinking well of the department; secretaries are true gatekeepers and
opinion molders.
F. Finance and Accounting
The aviation department manager probably spends the second largest amount of
his or her nonaviation time on financial matters—the largest amount of time spent is, or
should be, on personnel matters. Financial matters equate to resources, resources that
make the difference between a struggling, barely-able-to-get-by department and one that
achieves excellence with a measure of style. Therefore, the manager spends much time
on financial issues just to stay ahead of the other cost centers within the organization that
vie for available resources. Each of the items shown in the financial processes sidebar
are equally important and must be kept in balance if the department’s goals and
objectives are to be met.
A key issue in working with expenses, budgets, and accounting in general is that
the accounting department must be able to process the purchase orders, invoices, bills,
and credits and provide operating divisions with reports in a timely manner if
management is to be able to properly control financial matters. If invoices are held and
not processed and paid for weeks at a time and/or if journal and variance reports are not
released until two weeks into a new month, then managers are always far behind real
time and never sure of where they stand with their vendors or the budget. The accounting
process is a two-way street; if the accounting department expects adherence to financial
policies, then it must cooperate with operating divisions by providing accurate and
timely information.
Planning as a stand-alone subject is covered later in this chapter, but since
planning is an integral part of the budget cycle, it will be mentioned briefly here as it
applies to the financial process. Some flight departments consider financial planning for
budget purposes to be the process of adding anticipated annual inflation to last year’s
budget to arrive at the numbers to be submitted for next year’s budget. This so-called
incremental budgeting robs the manager of what can be a valuable tool to be used in
achieving departmental renewal and progress. This “lazy man’s” way of performing an
unpleasant task will not allow the department to move forward, to incorporate new
features, or to get rid of obsolete or inefficient processes. Corporate strategic and short-
term plans should be studied to determine the direction and goals of the company as a
whole. If the departmental goals do not fit into and support the organization’s plans, the
budget process will be difficult. By supporting the stated desires of the parent group, the
department can show that it is a member of the team, willing to subordinate its desires to
the greater good and be a full contributor to the joint effort.
The object of the planning process is to develop realistic goals that can be met
within a specified period of time. The normal tendency is to focus principally on short-
term goals to the detriment of the long view. A well-integrated set of long- and short-
term goals that fit into the corporate view of the future should form the basis for a
realistic and easily justified budget. To be of real value, goals must be quantifiable so
that progress toward them may be measured. Merely saying that the department will
have a goal of improved customer service probably will not be achieved because no
performance factors have been assigned. However, a goal stating that the semiannual
passenger satisfaction survey will yield 10 percent more passengers describing service as
good or excellent is something that can be quantified and progress measured toward
reaching it.
A budget is an extension of the planning process that restates short-term goals in
financial terms. The budget takes an abstract concept such as providing on-demand air
transportation and gives it the detailed resources necessary to bring the concept to
reality. Unfortunately, most people do not view the subject in such lofty terms. Rather,
they look at the budget-building process as a tedious, no-win game played for the benefit
of the accounting department and the budget itself as a tattle-tale device that can only
show the boss that they are not performing well. These negative stereotypes have arisen
in large part from a lack of understanding of the budget process and what it can mean to
the department in terms of resources to be gained.
Depreciation expense, sometimes included in flight department operating budgets
(not shown in this example), recognizes the fact that from an accounting standpoint, a
capital asset (property or device possessing value) has a finite life span and, therefore,
loses value over its life span. When its useful life has expired, only its residual or resale
value remains. The decreasing value of the asset is recognized over its accounting life as
a fixed expense. Flight department personnel must be aware of depreciation provisions
to more fully appreciate its effects on budgets and other accounting features. It is
important to note that there are two types of depreciation: tax and book. Tax depreciation
refers to the tax consequences of reducing the taxable value of the asset over a minimum
period of time specified by tax authorities—as few as 5 years for a corporate aircraft. At
the end of the taxable depreciation period, only a small residual value, often as little as
10 percent, remains. Book depreciation refers to the actual decrease or increase
(appreciation) in value of the asset during the intended period of use by the company. In
practice, the book value of a popular aircraft after 5 or even 10 years of use may actually
be greater than its purchase price.
All of this effort requires the cooperation of many people within the company,
beginning with the CEO and ending with just about every employee who has a goal to
reach. It is the budget-cycle process that links the diverse organizational groups in their
competition for the resources that will enable the company to complete its mission and,
hopefully, make a profit. However, the means by which the cycle is completed, the
financial accounting system, must be capable of completing all the stated tasks in a
timely and accurate manner. Without a sufficiently fast and accurate system, the budget
cycle will not function efficiently enough to be of value as a forecasting and measuring
tool. For example, if the accounting department cannot enter information concerning
obligated expenses in a timely manner to enable monthly reports to be sent to the
operating departments by the tenth of the following month, the operating managers have
no up-todate information regarding their financial performance and progress toward their
goals.
Each year companies begin the budget cycle by setting forth general budget goals
that flow from their long- and short-range plans. These goals may be expressed as a
desire to increase sales or profits by a certain percentage or to decrease expenses by
absolute amounts or percentages of individual budget line items or the entire budget. By
the time these budget goals (actually mandates) have reached the flight department,
several layers of additional detail may have been added to the original broad goals,
thereby adding further constraints to an already constrained budget. A budget worksheet
is usually provided that shows the previous year’s budgeted and actual expenditures.
Spaces are provided for the budget request for the upcoming fiscal year by budget line
item, as designated in the accounting department’s chart of accounts. It is important to
have the proper level of detail in the chart of accounts that supports the actual types of
expenditures used by the flight department. Accounting departments sometimes force
flight departments to use codes that have existed within the company as a consequence
of its line of business, including truck heavy maintenance, small craft repairs, machinery
maintenance/overhaul, and sales training. If these classifications are used, it will be
difficult to determine where the department’s funds are expended.
hile it is not necessary to provide an analysis for each category of expense, it will
provide a useful record of the assumptions and factors used in reaching a decision
regarding a particular budget request item. This is particularly true when the reason for
an estimate is needed for future reference. When building a budget, the standard methods
of budget estimation and justification used by the parent organization should be followed
carefully. Failure to understand the process probably will require resubmission of the
budget request, bringing unwanted attention to the department. Further, a contact within
the accounting department will prove very useful when questions concerning budget
policy or procedures arise. Moreover, discussing budget philosophy and corporate
strategy concerning the upcoming fiscal year with the flight department reporting senior
should yield valuable insights.
While it is not necessary to provide an analysis for each category of expense, it
will provide a useful record of the assumptions and factors used in reaching a decision
regarding a particular budget request item. This is particularly true when the reason for
an estimate is needed for future reference. When building a budget, the standard methods
of budget estimation and justification used by the parent organization should be followed
carefully. Failure to understand the process probably will require resubmission of the
budget request, bringing unwanted attention to the department. Further, a contact within
the accounting department will prove very useful when questions concerning budget
policy or procedures arise. Moreover, discussing budget philosophy and corporate
strategy concerning the upcoming fiscal year with the flight department reporting senior
should yield valuable insights.
This type of budget recognizes that certain purchases have long-term value or the
ability to create value for the company. Machinery, buildings, furniture, computers, and
aircraft fall into this category. Because of the ability to create or enhance value for the
company, the object is assigned a finite life over which it is expensed. Therefore, if an
aircraft is purchased new, it may be assigned a tax life of as little as 5 years and may be
expensed over that period, leaving just a residual value at the end of the period.
Capital budgets are important for flight departments because they are not
considered a part of the annual operations budget. In essence, the capital budget is a
separate budget used for buying permanent, major assets. It is a way of obtaining a new
hangar, ground support equipment, aircraft equipment upgrades and interior
refurbishments, support vehicles, and furniture essentially off-budget—the normal
operations budget, that is. However, the capital items must be justified and put into
competition with other capital item proposals made by the rest of the company. And if
the company is to realize some value from the money it invests, it must be capable of
producing some measurable benefit for the company.
Sample justifications are shown in a subsequent section. Any major purchase or
expense should be reviewed by accounting for possible inclusion in the capital budget.
Removing major items, especially unanticipated items, from the operations budget will
make the department appear more in compliance with the planned expenditures and
enable it to gain needed items When budgets are being built, large variances are
anticipated or received, or new budgeted items are contemplated, a justification
statement may be required to accompany the other budget documents. This is merely a
detailed description of the item or service to be purchased along with an explanation of
its purpose and utility.
G. Personnel
The members of the flight department are its most important asset. Their expertise
and willingness to perform are its real treasure. Without those attributes, the department
is, at best, a mediocre group of aviation personnel. Their willingness to perform, or
motivation, must be properly channeled and shaped if a high-quality product is to result.
The channeling or directing function leads to the concept of teamwork—equally
important as motivation. If the people all act independently and without regard for one
another, however well they perform, the result may be chaos rather than a smoothly
running organization. The art form for the aviation department manager is to
successfully direct and channel the efforts of assigned personnel to form an effective and
efficient team of professionals that will provide high-quality air transportation services
to the company. This art form is called leadership.
There is normally an abundance of well-qualified pilots and AMTs in the job
market at any given time. In times of expansion and prosperity for corporate aviation, the
best qualified people are not as apparent or available, but they are there. However, a
wallet full of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) certificates and years of
experience do not ensure that any individual will work well in your operation. The
culture of the company and the department dictate the required personality of the
prospective employee, not the proper certification and experience. Perhaps the greatest
difficulty in finding the right employee is to determine the corporate and departmental
culture and then find a match for those characteristics. If the company is mature and well
structured, a less formal, free-spirit personality may not fit well. Conversely, if the
company is in its entrepreneurial stage, this type of personality may prove a good fit.
Take the time to fully evaluate candidates for employment. Consider using the items
listed in the above sidebar.
Perhaps more than any other single personnel management skill, the leader’s
ability to motivate is the single factor that will get the most and best work out of people.
Motivation creates an internal incentive within a person to accomplish a task at hand.
Instilling and maintaining this incentive should be a primary job of the manager. Another
issue is understanding what factors contribute to job satisfaction. Nobody likes surprises,
particularly on the job. If complete and detailed expectations of job performance are not
provided (and updated regularly), a worker will be constantly surprised by the tasks
assigned. Job descriptions, task briefings with completion standards included, and
regular feedback concerning performance are essential items to be communicated to
every employee. If an organization’s employees are its most valuable asset, then they
must be maintained and upgraded so that the organization continues to realize a return on
those assets. Getting the new person to a point of full productivity may take 6 months or
more; this is a major task that should pay handsome dividends in the long term. With this
concept firmly in mind, develop an initial asset investment plan for the new hire.
There was a time when a pilot showed up, flew the trip, did not spill the boss’
coffee, and went home to wait for the next go ‘round. As long as he or she did not bend
metal or egos, the pilot’s job was secure, and the cost-of-living increases continued. The
same was true for the maintenance technicians: Keep ‘em flying with a minimum of
fuss, and the job “spoke for itself.” During these halcyon days, the concept of a periodic
employee evaluation for aviation department personnel was considered at least
superfluous, and at best, mildly demeaning. These were professionals—they were above
something so crass as an attempt to evaluate their highly developed skills.
Experience has shown that pilots do not quite fit into the manager category, nor
do they entirely fit into the technical professional group. And aviation maintenance
technicians (AMTs) are different enough from steam plant workers to warrant another
look at performance measurements. Pilots and technicians are well compensated not only
to demonstrate a high level of skill in the aeronautical environment but also to stay
within the legal framework of the many rules and guidelines provided. Should they be
evaluated on a level of technical performance that is at once a standard and excellent as
well? If they do not measure up to the high standards of technical competence required
of them, they probably should not have the job.
Flight and human resources departments often endure strained relationships due to
the isolation and uniqueness of the company aviation branch. As far as human resources
is concerned, the flight department works out of a nontraditional, often distant location
and communicates precious little information regarding its activities. The flight
department may be heard from only when something is wrong with an employee’s
vacation balance or pension contribution. From the flight department’s point of view,
human resources always wants something: a performance evaluation, a pension election
verification, or attendance at a boring lecture. The uniqueness of aviation personnel
makes job classification and salary administration a problem for human resources. Pilots
are neither technicians nor managers, yet they share certain attributes with these
occupations. Aviation maintenance technicians seem like automobile mechanics or
machinery workers, yet they too do not quite fit existing job classifications. The
receptionist/secretary/scheduler/accounting clerk composite person present in many
departments defies all comparison. All this makes fair compensation for department
personnel difficult and sometimes contentious.
Most flight departments devote a majority of their training and personnel
development time and money to technical issues. Initial, upgrade, transition,
supplementary, and recurrent training on specific equipment or other aviation issues is
purchased to ensure that the department is current, competent, and safe in producing its
primary product, ondemand air transportation for the parent organization. Many
managers consider this training an investment in safety and efficiency for the
department. Beyond these basics, however, many pilots, technicians, dispatchers, and
schedulers may have a greater potential value to the department and company in
nonaviation pursuits. Early development of latent organizational, administrative,
leadership, and management skills in people will pay dividends later in the individual’s
tenure with the larger organization. And most people respond well to new opportunities
and challenges if they are delivered in a considered, nonthreatening manner. This is
particularly important for flight departments where upward mobility is limited due to the
small size and specialized nature of the work.
All the items shown in the sidebar below may be true and have stood the test of
time, but leadership may be the single most important characteristic possessed by the
head of the department. This is true even if the department consists of just one airplane
and two people. The leader is the person with the foresight, vision, and responsibility to
carry out that vision for the organization. Notice that the terms manager and leader are
not necessarily interchangeable. The “Leaders do the right things; managers do things
right” statement tells the story. Leaders motivate people; managers channel the
motivation. The military found out the hard way that the management training for its
officers that it invested in during the 1960s and 1970s did not necessarily translate to the
needs of the battlefield. Managers thrived in Washington; they did less well in team-
oriented, goal-directed stressful situations that required a leader.
H. Flight Department Performance
A popular maxim taught in business schools states that if a process or product
cannot be measured, it cannot be controlled or managed. Thus accurate measurement of
business processes relies heavily on a series of yardsticks designed to provide
management with information that can be used to control the business. Corporate flight
does not escape this need. Whenever chief pilots and aviation department managers
congregate, the subject of operating costs is usually a staple of conversation. It seems
that their reporting seniors want to know how well their flight department stacks up in
relation to other departments. Compensation, maintenance, fuel, and overhaul costs are
all subjects of interest.
Efficiency is usually measured as a ratio of output to input for a given activity.
Efficiency asks the question, “Is a given action being performed with minimum
effort/resources?” compared with the concept of effectiveness, which asks the question,
“Is this product or service fulfilling the organization’s mission adequately?” The two
concepts are different but complementary. You may be providing aircraft services very
inexpensively, but in so doing, the flights may be late or delayed—efficient but not
effective. Conversely, the flights could be always on time but done so at great expense—
effective but not efficient. Thus the two concepts must be considered together to provide
a complete picture.
Most organizations examine efficiency and effectiveness in both financial and
productivity terms. Ratio analysis is a well-developed and respected method of
measuring performance. This methodology reports key factors as fractions or
percentages of one another. For example, simply looking at profits after taxes is a single
data point that gives no indication of how profitable the company is. However, if profits
after taxes are divided by assets, a figure known as return on investment (ROI) is
generated. If a company had $1 million in assets and made a $150,000 profit after taxes,
it would have an ROI of 15 percent. This number either could be compared with some
other period in the company’s history or could be compared with an industry average. If
last year’s ROI was 10 percent but the industry average is 20 percent, things are
improving but perhaps not enough. ROI is just one of many financial indicators used to
determine corporate health. Similarly, the production department compares hourly
output of goods produced with the number of employees required to accomplish it to
arrive at an employee productivity ratio. Service providers may determine how many
customers an employee can serve per hour. Whatever the measure, the key is a
comparison between two related variables.
A means of tracking and recording the necessary data to generate these ratios
must be devised. While it is possible to generate some of these numbers with paper
records, a calculator, and a stubby pencil, the easiest, and in some cases, the only way to
accomplish this is via a computer. Some departments have generated relatively
sophisticated tracking and recordkeeping programs in-house, but most companies use the
report writing capability of off-the-shelf proprietary computer software designed
specifically for the scheduling and operational data records of on-demand flight
department operations. Choosing the proper software for your operation is an important
choice; suffice it to say that the software capabilities should be evaluated carefully to
ensure a good fit for your operation. Many of these programs have features that may not
be necessary or serve your operation well. Some software may not be able to generate
the data and ratios you want. Ask for an extensive demonstration and ask other flight
departments who use the software for their appraisal before you buy.
Once the desired ratios are generated, they must be compared with other reference
points to be meaningful. A common method used is to compare this information with
that of a previous time period. Comparison with the previous month or quarter may not
be realistic, given seasonal anomalies or aircraft availability. However, comparison with
the same month or quarter in the previous year may be more realistic. For the long view,
comparison of the current period ratio with a moving 12- or 24-month average of that
ratio is probably most useful. This method smooths out the short-term perturbations
associated with periodic data and presents the values with greater perspective.
What do you do with the information once it has been generated? The results of
these calculations should be shared with both department personnel and corporate
management, although the same information may not be appropriate for both groups. Let
management know the “big picture” items, such as cost per hour, load factor,
cancellation rate, etc. There is some risk of providing them with too much information,
i.e., more information than they can understand or appreciate. For example, does
management really want to know how productive the flight crews are, i.e., how many
trips/hours/days/days away from home the crews fly? Probably not until it comes time to
reengineer, resize, or downsize. It may be helpful to track these numbers internally for
just such an eventuality.
Note that the term information has been used instead of the term data. This usage
is intentional to denote the difference between a large number of unrelated facts (data)
and facts that have been collated, analyzed, and presented in a fashion that will prove
useful and are designed to inform. Merely providing line after line of trip detail and
passenger manifests will do little to help the nonaviation manager assess performance.
This detail may be provided to selected users to be used as a permanent record for their
files. Accounting may need this level of detail for tax purposes, or the president may
want to scan the previous month’s flights to determine who is using the aircraft and to
correlate these data with other pertinent business details. Whatever the reason, there
should be an explicit, stated purpose for providing high levels of detail to recipients
outside the flight department.
What does the boss do with this prized information? How is it used? Does it tell
him or her how well the flight department is accomplishing its mission? Does it provide
information on how well the department uses its resources or its efficiency?
Unfortunately, many organizations do not ask these questions. As a consequence, flight
department reports become self-perpetuating monuments to poor information
management. The usual answer I get when I ask why a monthly report is sent to
headquarters is, “We’ve always done it.”
The priorities for most flight department managers usually come down to two big
ones: safety and keeping the boss happy. Having achieved these on a daily basis (you
hope), the same majority of operators turn to the more mundane, unglamorous tasks of
ensuring that the fundamentals of the department work well enough to support its
principal goals. It is these details that determine how well the department performs.
These details assume primary importance when a review of the flight department is
conducted either internally or by a third-party contractor. Flight department self-audits
tend to review policies and procedures that ensure compliance with national regulations,
maintenance programs, and company directives. A more comprehensive view of the
department—an outside audit—examines management, organizational, customer service,
and efficiency issues. The end result of both types of investigations answers the
question, “Is the department safe, and does it comply with applicable regulations and
policies?” Ideally, an outside audit goes one step further and yields an answer to the
question, “How well-managed and efficient is the operation?”
Company policies include such diverse items as the care and feeding of
passengers, crew duty times, takeoff weather minimums, recording aircraft
discrepancies, and scheduling. To be communicated effectively to corporate
management, passengers, and the flight department, all this information should be in
writing and published, normally in the form of a flight operations manual. This manual
should be comprehensive and serve as a central reference work for all concerned with
corporate flight operations (see the NBAA Management Guide). The final category of
standards looks at best industry practices, i.e., policies and procedures shown to be
successful when used by similar flight operations. While comparison with unwritten
standards may seem unfair at first, most flight department managers want to know how
they stack up against similar departments. Being introduced to new ideas and concepts in
this manner is one way to be exposed to other ways of running an operation and to
compare one’s operation with others considered to be “best in class.”
As noted earlier, if all the basic elements of the flight department come together
under enlightened managers, excellence can happen. This excellence will be readily
apparent to the auditor/evaluator soon after arrival, too. Flight department personnel
normally exhibit a high level of confidence and pride in their operation. However, if
poor teamwork or morale problems exist, these features will become readily apparent to
the evaluator during the personnel interview process. These intangibles are an important
part of the audit for the investigator. While they may not be manifested by letter-perfect
recordkeeping or high standards that have been set, they are an indication of the real
performance of the department.
While many flight departments are not required to submit or live under a budget
or otherwise attempt to economize on any aspect of their operation, doing so is good
management. Even if the boss does not care, the flight department manager should care
about saving a buck just because it is a subset of being efficient, doing more with less.
Granted, those who do not have to may not squeeze a nickel until it screams, but there is
virtue and a sense of personal accomplishment when you strike a good deal. Whether it
is saving $50,000 on a 12-year inspection or 15 cents on a gallon of jet fuel, doing so
makes one feel like something good has been achieved.
I. Marketing the Flight Department
The real object of marketing is to sell something, a product or service. But first,
you have to let the buyers know that the service or product exists, that it has potential
value for them, and that it will make their life easier and more pleasant, or contribute to
their success. More on marketing later; first, the real object: sales. Regardless of your
daily activity, you are probably attempting to sell something to someone. Be it
introducing the concept of a new scheduling format to the scheduler, getting the
Challenger to the maintenance chief 10 hours early for its inspection, or getting a pilot to
go to training a week early, you, in fact, are a salesperson. If you’re not, you may be
either a dictator or a do-nothing—equally distasteful options.
Unfortunately, times change. Chairpersons, presidents, and CEOs come and go.
More importantly, CFOs and other corporate officers who may have designs on your
budget come and go. What you are doing today is really history in the making; it’s what
you can sell tomorrow that determines your ultimate job security. And the quarterly
financial results may have a surprisingly large amount of control over the flight
department’s destiny. One bad quarter, no problem. Two bad quarters, they are looking
for quick cuts. Three bad quarters and the entire company becomes fiscally paranoid,
waiting for the budget axe to fall. Or, an upstart commuter airline begins service between
your most popular city-pairs; the drop in demand can be dramatic in the wake of these
entrepreneurial inroads. Without a broad base of support within the company, the
vagaries of the business world may make the corporate aviation function tenuous at best.
Service must be considered in terms of the entire company, not just the few senior
executives afforded the privilege of ondemand air transportation. It is the ability of the
flight department to actively and significantly support the core mission and goals of the
company that produces value. Without the concept of the flight department producing
value planted in the minds of a majority of the corporate decision makers, the days of the
employees who work at the airport may be numbered.
This brings us to the real reason for marketing the flight department’s services
within the company: the flight department is an integral part of the company and,
therefore, should be contributing to return on investment/return on equity (ROI/ROE) as
much as the manufacturing or other service functions of the company. While these
returns may be difficult to prove in hard numbers, it is the perception of value provided
that will cement the position of the flight department within the company. Does this
mean that the flight department manager must employ smoke-and-mirrors sales
techniques to make the company believe it’s getting a good deal from its aircraft?
Absolutely not. Such deceptive tactics will most likely backfire; only solid, honest
means of explaining to people how corporate aircraft can help them will carry the day.
While the terms “marketing” and “selling” are sometimes used interchangeably,
they are quite different. Marketing is the act of promoting a product or service, while
selling involves the actual act of transfer of goods or services. Therefore, both must be
accomplished if a business is to be successful. Marketing is important, since few people
in the company are aware of the existence of the flight department or know of its
capabilities. The aircraft are normally used by a small fraction of company personnel,
and knowledge of this activity is known only to a few others. Without marketing, no one
besides the same few will be aware of the activity, and no further “sales” will occur. But
first, a word about corporate politics.
Perhaps the best tool in this venture is a well-motivated marketeer/salesperson. If
the desire to promote your product is there, it will get done. But, to help you demonstrate
value, you must provide concrete examples of how your way of doing things is superior.
Ask your corporate marketing staff—they know how. But first, know what your are
selling. NBAA’s Travel$ense travel analysis software provides you with the ability to
show actual value and competitive advantage of corporate aircraft over air charter or the
airlines. This computer program steps you through the many variables involved in travel
analysis and presents solutions in a graphic and easy to understand manner. This
software may be the best sales tool available to you because it presents practical, realistic
examples of transportation solutions in business terms. Without it, you will have to do a
lot of research and calculator punching
J. Customer Relationship Management, the Other CRM
Actually, this CRM is in some ways more important to the life and longevity of a
flight department than good flight crew communication, coordination, and problem
solving. The other CRM is sweeping the business world as one of the hottest techniques
to obtain, understand, serve, and keep customers. Customer Relationship Management
has been used by consumer-centered organizations for years as both a strategy and a
technique to learn more about customer needs and behaviors in order to develop stronger
relationships with them.
While many businesses say the customer is the most important part of their
operation, that without them they would be nothing, few really follow through and live
the customer-first life. Unfortunately, this is the case in many flight departments. All too
often flight departments fall into the trap of becoming order-takers—answer the phone,
schedule a trip, fly the trip, and enter the chargeback fee. There is a ready cadre of upper
level executives who regularly use the aircraft, so the concept of attracting, serving, and
pleasing customers is lost in the daily effort to make the flight schedule work. Most
ominous in this process is the tendency to believe that, with just minimal effort on the
part of the flight department, the passengers will keep coming back because the
alternative, the airlines, is too awful for them to even contemplate. This is the captive
audience fallacy that creeps into many flight departments.
CRM attempts to define customers in terms of needs, desires, preferences, habits,
likes, dislikes, and future requests. Moreover, it attempts to create a story about the
ongoing relationship between the company and the customer. It becomes a central
repository for every interaction between company and customer. In doing so, it tries to
make every contact point between the customer and company aware of the latest episode
in the relationship. In other words, CRM systems chronicle and probe the continuing
saga between company and customer. Done correctly it may even provide interesting
reading.
What do you need to know about passengers? Most flight departments know that
the boss wants specific items like The Wall Street Journal, Pepsi, and honey-roasted
peanuts, but surprisingly few know about more-subtle preferences regarding magazines
to have available and his preference for French Roast coffee and Perrier. It’s attention to
details like these that makes the difference between merely good and truly exceptional
service. Further, the boss hates to have Wemac air outlets blowing in his face, likes
Beck’s Lite with rice crackers, and wants to read Sports Illustrated on the way home.
Does he have any anxieties about flying, such as operating near thunderstorms or
moderate chop/turbulence? These are the obvious elements of attentive service for the
chosen few, but what about the rest? How far down the food chain do you attempt to
cater to the company’s executives? Perhaps the right answer is: as far as necessary to
ensure the reputation of the flight department. That means all of them.
Keeping preferences straight is easy if there are only four or five passengers who
regularly use the aircraft. But when the number gets greater, keeping the various
permutations and combinations of preferences straight becomes an increasingly large
problem. Therefore, some system of recording, disseminating, and updating customer
information is necessary. Fortunately, many types of scheduling software contain a
passenger preference section that covers a wide variety of items you should know about.
If you don’t have this capability, contact databases, such as Microsoft Outlook ® , will
provide the information needed.
The database should also be used to trigger interactions with the passenger,
potential passengers, and their assistants. For instance, do these people understand what
corporate aircraft bring them in terms of time saved and value produced? Simple
tutorials, such as NBAA’s Travel$ense software, may be used to demonstrate these
features. In fact, this software will produce individualized reports that portray aggregates
of these values, which are powerful marketing tools. Similarly, potential passengers can
be shown the value of the company aircraft compared to alternative forms of
transportation.
The object of all this it to cultivate, promote, and maintain a high quality
relationship with the customer, one in which they will feel a genuine sense of loyalty to
your operation. Until the customer feels a sense of attachment to the flight department,
any relationship will be tenuous at best. Relationships are born and bred through a series
of satisfying customer experiences. That is, each and every interaction with the flight
department should be a good one, one in which the passenger feels that he/she has
received some value.
K. The Small Flight Department
Approximately four-fifths of NBAA members have just one aircraft. This means
that there are a lot of small operations that work with between one and three full-time
individuals and contract out the majority of their services. These departments must be
efficient, flexible, and creative just to survive; they must have their priorities in order
and run a tight organization. The key to this organization is its head. Whether the title is
aviation department manager, chief pilot, or grand vizier, this person must have a Swiss
army knife collection of management, people, technical, and organizational skills. This
individual should be comfortable with independence and unilateral decision making.
Moreover, he or she probably prefers this organization to a more structured and
bureaucratic one; self-reliance is a prized characteristic.
Getting the word out (and back) correctly becomes a major role of the department
manager, whether it is aircraft capabilities and limitations, the daily flight schedule,
hangar rent, recurrent training, pilot hiring, or equipment upgrades. The skill with which
the manager presents the case for aviation and negotiates for the items needed to run the
department well in large part determines the degree of success the department enjoys. If
the parent organization never hears from the department or hears from it only when it
needs something, it will suffer. If the manager makes an effort to become an integral part
of the larger organization, the chances of the department prospering increase markedly.
Do not forget to cultivate the communications habit among all department personnel;
managers always need a communications backup and all the salespeople they can get.
The other usual player in a small department is typically a copilot or combination
copilot/mechanic. This person also has to have a broad-based bag of skills to
complement that of his or her boss. And since this may be the only other person in the
department, he or she is often given “everything else” by default; there is nobody else to
give “it” to. But is there? Successful small departments have developed a support staff
within the parent organization to help them with their many tasks. Instead of remaining
the remote and mysterious people at the airport who fly the boss around, the clever
departments have recruited company personnel to do their work for them while they fly.
These departments have done so by communicating well with the principal’s office,
human resources, finance, and administration departments to make them appreciate their
unique role within the company. By asking questions, learning to appreciate the other’s
roles within the company, and establishing a friendly relationship with the important
departments, the flight department has gained allies and a support staff to assist it with
its functions.
Since the experience and knowledge base for the small department is relatively
small, a network of other flight departments is essential to finding the best deals and for
assistance in time of need. If another flight department on the field can recommend a
maintenance or parts vendor from its own experience, this is valuable information.
Word-of-mouth recommendations made by someone who has a similar operation will
save you much time and effort in searching for a vendor on your own. And if you need a
part, a special tool, advice, a copilot, or merely someone to commiserate with, your
trusted network probably will pay immediate and bountiful dividends. Building the
network may not be easy, particularly if you operate a relatively rare aircraft or are
located at a small, remote airport with few corporate operators. Working with the aircraft
manufacturer’s customer service organization or aviation association should soon yield
suitable networkers. Operators at airports that are normal destinations for your
department are candidates for your network, too. If you get to those facilities more than
once every 2 weeks or so, they may be able to provide mutual services and aid.
The one-airplane airline is out of business if its single aeronautical asset becomes
unserviceable due to either scheduled or unscheduled maintenance. However, this need
not lead to disastrous consequences. Scheduled maintenance should be scheduled to
coincide with known slow travel periods for the normal users of the operation and well
publicized in advance to preclude possible disappointments. Unscheduled maintenance is
a bit more tricky but manageable. An arrangement with a local charter operator to
provide shortnotice backup for your flights is a good solution to the specter of an
unserviceable aircraft. Operators on the field are specially helpful because of their
proximity and potential for short response times. Interchange and time-share
arrangements (previously mentioned) are ideal ways to obtain a backup for your
operations. However, creating a mind-set among the regular passengers that an
occasional trip may have to be delayed or canceled due to maintenance or weather is an
essential part of the department manager’s role, too.
One of the most important functions for the small operator should be that of
planning for the future. Whether it be preparation for the heavy transportation
requirements for the annual board retreat, equipment upgrades, augmenting the
department with additional personnel, or planning for the purchase of the next aircraft,
foresight and planning always should be in the mind of the manager. If not, events surely
will overtake the operation, and the value of the department will be reduced and
credibility lost. Credibility of the operation is probably the most important asset of the
flight department; it must be protected. The manager must allocate a sufficient amount of
time to look to the future, long and short term, to ensure the continued health of the
department.
