Letters inbox
Email your views to BBT editor Paul Revel at
editor@buyingbusinesstravel.com
THE RUSSIAN ASSOCIATION OF BUSINESS TRAVEL (ABT) is a corporate travel buyer- driven association actively promoting the development of the business travel environment in Russia and the CIS. We recently hosted an education session entitled Looking for effective ways to prepare and conduct a tender. The event was attended by more than 70 employees of travel and purchasing departments, from major Russian and international companies, including Lukoil, Accenture, Ernst and Young, Astra Zeneca, Gazprombank, Pepsico and more. Irina Kuznetsova, vice-
president at JSC VTB Bank, presented the tender process as a spiral that includes cost analysis, defining requirements, market analysis, procurement procedure, supplier selection and, finally, a contract. She said that before bidding for a supplier it’s necessary to deeply analyse the company’s relationships with existing service suppliers. Experts agreed that agency
116
fees should not be the only determining factor when selecting a TMC. Accenture workplace lead Olga Khorasanova said: “Accenture wants a partnership with the TMC that can give us effective strategic advice on decision-making.” Kuznetsova noted that negotiations during the process can last from six to nine months – and should involve not only travel and purchasing departments, but also lawyers, finance specialists, external clients and, of course, senior management. Speakers stressed that
request for proposal (RFP) bids should contain the maximum number of requirements to
service suppliers and clear evaluation criteria. If the corporate buyer does not clarify details, such as TMC response times and responsibility for issuing visa documents, they could be in for unpleasant surprises. Svetlana Denikina Managing editor,
Russian Association of Business Travel (ABT)
GIVEN THE CURRENT ECONOMIC climate, we have found the long-running debate on hotel travel policy versus business traveller choice is once again in focus, as corporates seek to manage business travel expenditure in testing times. Clearly, there are advantages to either option, but is one better than the other? It is something that we are frequently asked by regular customers. There is no exact answer. A ‘preferred hotel’ travel
policy gives the customer the ability to develop a mutually beneficial relationship that can ultimately benefit both organisations and their business travelling employees. A ‘travellers choice hotel’ policy allows the individual to express his or her own purchase decision based on their own tastes, requirements and budget, and is easy to administer using a TMC hotel programme, local knowledge or the internet.
In our opinion, there is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ policy and the best response is to tailor the policy to the individual needs of the company, based on a set of specific factors that are most important to them. The key point is not to steer customers to one or the other, but to work with them to understand
EVOLVE OR FACE EXTINCTION
aim was to colonise space (more or less) – we are still far from it but still moving in that direction. When low-cost airlines first started flying, some thought it would never work, because people would not accept such basic service. And there are several ways of approaching the ideas behind MT2.0. Just because we do not see the feasibility of realising the complete idea, it doesn’t mean we should write the whole concept off as undeliverable. It’s a challenge for travel managers worldwide, but then again, who was it who said that not evolving is what makes you extinct?
R Geert Behets
Director, global travel and fleet management, UCB Pharma
This letter wins the writer a bottle of champagne
egarding your feature on Managed Travel 2.0: shouldn’t we approach this as with all radical ideas? Evaluate the core messages and take bold steps, even without completely reaching the boldest ideas? When men started talking about space travel, the
their specific requirements and reasons for purchase and develop a flexible policy from an informed position. Regardless of which option
is eventually chosen, hoteliers must work with partners, suppliers and agents to control costs and ensure expenditure doesn’t get out of hand. In this way we can meet the needs of the business traveller and large corporates, and continue to secure the business. LeRoy Sheppard Director of sales, UK and Ireland, Maritim Hotels
ONLINE COMMENTS
RESPONDING TO THE ‘HOTEL HYGIENE’ FEATURE: A traveller who had been badly bitten by bed bugs fired off a letter of complaint to the management. He was pleased to get a reply almost by return, offering a fulsome apology, explaining that not in 20 years had the hotel had a problem with bed bugs, and that every step was being taken to ensure there was no recurrence. Feeling somewhat reassured that his complaint had been taken seriously, the traveller then noticed his original letter
still attached to the back of the apology, with a scribbled note on it, which read: “Send the guy the bug letter”.
RESPONDING TO ‘BA INTRODUCES HAND LUGGAGE-ONLY FARES’: As a retired BA captain and VFF (very frequent flyer) I applaud this move. Hold-loaded bags caused me and BA more problems, perhaps, than any other single issue. A reduction in the number of passengers with luggage will help on-time departures, losses due to mislaid bags and many other cost savings. If only I could persuade my wife that she does not need a suitcase!
RESPONDING TO REPORT ON WILLIE WALSH OPENING THE BUSINESS TRAVEL SHOW 2013: I enjoyed listening to Willie at the Business Travel Show. I notice that he offered no solution to expansion; on the BBC’s Question Time in October last year, he said he did not want a third runway. At the show, he said he did not want a new runway at Gatwick or Stansted, nor did not want a new airport. He did however, say that BA are OK at Heathrow, unlike other airlines.
MARCH/APRIL 2013
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128