This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
ASK THE EXPERTS


Being upfront Pre-trip approval is increasingly being used to drive compliance G


ETTING APPROVAL FOR A TRIP BEFORE IT HAPPENS is becoming more prevalent, as corporates continue to focus on cost control. It is also increasingly being used as a means of ensuring companies can meet duty-of-care requirements when travellers are going to risky destinations. As a result, many larger companies have moved away from post-trip approval


– essentially using the expense claim process to decide whether a trip was a legitimate use of corporate funds. The difficulty in enforcing non-approved claims also means that upfront approval is often more palatable. Improvements in technology, particularly mobile, mean that the tools associated with pre-trip approval are becoming quicker to use and easier to manage.


THE BUYER BEN VAREY, global category manager – travel and fleet, SGS


“PRE-TRIP APPROVAL IS THE NORM AT LARGER COMPANIES NOW,” says Ben Varey. “All the companies that I have worked for have had active, rather than passive approval. This means that every trip must get the nod from an approver, rather than a stream of potential trips passing them by and only the ones that stand out, rather like mis- shapen biscuits on a production line, being grabbed for rejection.” Varey says that rather than being seen as a way of slowing things down, active


approval is actually very efficient. “Before I have put a trip through the system, I have either discussed it on the phone or in an email with my boss. I would rarely just put a trip through and surprise him.” As a result, approval is most often just a formality. “What I inherited was a combination of different approval systems, including some amazing databases people had built themselves that were so sophisticated we could have sold them to others.” SGS moved to its current streamlined system of pre-trip approval when it changed


travel management company (TMC). Egencia now handles the pre-trip approval process, both on- and offline. “There was a little resistance to the change but the booking tool we implemented was so much better and more efficient that people were very happy.” The switch to Egencia saw a “very swift move” to high online adoption, he says. “That has recently helped the approval process.” Approval is handled by email on the desktop or, increasingly, on mobile devices. “The person approving varies by business and country,” says Varey. “We have a global


framework policy which gives certain criteria about who needs to do what. Businesses and countries can be more, but not less stringent than that. In some companies it would be the managing director doing the approvals; in others it would be the line manager. “People are good at delegating so they don’t get caught in permanent approval loops


and increasingly, with the ability to approve on mobile, people are approving trips on their holidays. It may not be right but it’s part of the modern world. The current system works infinitely more smoothly than the historical systems.” Varey says approvers and travellers are educated on the need to approve quickly.


“We do make people aware that delay could cause problems and increase costs.” A key point is to make sure you have someone who is a site administrator, says


Varey. “Online systems need to be well managed by an administrator to make them operate efficiently.”


52 BBT January/February 2017 THE CONSULTANT


CAROL RANDALL, founder and managing director, Sage Travel Consulting


“I THINK THERE IS A REAL RESURGENCE IN INTEREST FOR PRE-TRIP APPROVAL,” says Carol Randall. “There was a trend for passive approval, based on a ‘trust-me’ culture, but all the clients I talk to now are putting in a more formal pre-trip process.” So, which tool should you choose? “There is a range of different products


on the market but you need to have one that is integrated into the booking process. They have come along in leaps and bounds in recent years. Now you can put approval directly into the booking process and, if the trip is not being approved, the traveller has to change their behaviour.” The increase in instant ticketing,


linked to the rise of the low-cost carriers, can limit the value of pre-trip approval. “Most companies take the view that if they book a low-cost carrier it’s okay, because they are looking at a lower-cost option anyway.” Implementing an approval process


should have a clear link to compliance, believes Randall. “I put in an approval process for a client in Switzerland with some specific lowest logical fare rules. They went from mid-50 per cent compli- ance to 87 per cent within three months and are achieving 14 per cent overall savings in their travel budget.” She adds: “To me, best practice is to


have approval only required for non- compliant trips. That is how to use a tool to its best effect.” Approval is not just about cost, al-


though it remains important. “Follow- ing incidents like the recent Paris and Brussels terrorist attacks, you also have pre-trip approval for security reasons. For companies sending their people to a destination where there are risk issues, they have a responsibility for that.”


BUYINGBUSINESSTRAVEL.COM


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  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144