RETURN ON INVESTMENT BY BETTY LOW
RETURN JOURNEY
MEASURING THE ROI OF BUSINESS TRAVEL CONTINUES TO CHALLENGE – AND DIVIDE – THE INDUSTRY
BUSINESS TRAVEL WAS BADLY AFFECTED by the 2007/8 global financial crisis. Com- panies responded to stringent credit terms and harsh markets by slashing spend in areas they believed wouldn’t hurt their core business. Cutting back on staff training and business travel looked like a more attractive short- term option than reducing production or making staff redundant. But it wasn’t. Reducing face-to-face
contact with clients had adverse effects on many companies. They consequently resumed business travel but retained their focus on cost. The experience prompted some to try to connect spending on business travel with the business benefit, widely termed return on investment (ROI). The industry consensus is that this is an important, much-discussed topic but Carol Randall, head of consulting UK for Areka Consulting, believes that few are actually practising it in quantifiable terms. She says: “It opens up a whole can of worms. It’s really important but it’s not given the level of attention it should have because it sits in the ‘too difficult’ pot. It gets attention at times and then goes off the radar.”
RIGOROUS APPROACH This could be because it’s difficult to measure accurately the inputs and outputs. To truly link investment and benefit, a rigorous approach is necessary. Investment is the purchase of something today to create wealth in the future. This can either be a specific good that the buyer thinks will appreciate in value (for example, shares or a Picasso), or spending on development that will increase the capacity to make money (new equipment for a factory, for instance).
BUYINGBUSINESSTRAVEL.COM It is the latter category that people are
usually thinking of when they seek to assess the ROI in business travel. After all, many trips are undertaken to drive sales growth. It is important to remember, however, that just as there are two types of investment, there are, broadly speak- ing, two kinds of trip. Matthew Pancaldi, HRG’s global client management director, says: “Some things have to happen as the natural course of the business. Then there is the discretionary spend that you have more control over.” Adam Knights, UK managing director for
ATPI, which has many clients in the energy sector, points out that sending a crew to an oil rig is a cost of doing business and is not optional. It will not bring in more revenue but it is necessary to meet current business obligations. In these cases, he says, “we help customers understand where the cost of travel is more expensive – that is, sending a load of Norwegians to a rig in Canada might be more expensive than sending a load of Canadians to the same rig”. The travel that Pancaldi and Knights describe as necessary to conducting busi- ness could be considered fixed costs, and that which is more discretionary could be thought of as variable. In assessing return, most would ap-
proach the former as trying to maximise value (say, productive hours per £100 of travel outlay) from the spend. But the latter could be considered an investment, and any incremental revenues generated as a consequence considered the return on that investment.
THE BROADER VIEW All those interviewed for this feature contend the price of travel cannot be looked at in isolation from the trip’s
objective. Knowing the reason for travel is critical to being able to assess the return. At its crudest, there is the division between external (client-facing and usually deemed to be essential) and internal (within the company and often thought to be a ‘nice to have’ rather than a ‘must have’) travel. A decade ago the obituaries had been written for pre-trip reporting, but this technique has enjoyed a resurgence in popularity since the credit crunch. As well as allowing for approval – or rejection – of a request for travel, it also, importantly, enables the company to capture the reason for travel. Some types of business activity are easier to match cost-to-benefit than others. Projects will have been put together with their own budgets and travel will have been included within that budget. Areka’s Randall points out that “some companies have project-related business so it is easier to quantify”. HRG’s Pancaldi agrees that identifica- tion is important. “A code is attached to a booking. It could be a cost centre but it could also be a project code, which is a unique identifier,” he says. Guild of Travel Management Com- panies (GTMC) chief executive Paul Wait believes we should review how we view business travel. “Rather than just looking at reducing costs, we should be thinking about building businesses,” he says. If we start seeing travel in this way, he says, it will be easier to connect the investment with the return. “Then you can do a simple calculation of the cost of travel of people going on client-facing trips versus client revenue. People should think: ‘What is our revenue target for next year? Is that possible to achieve with fewer trips?’” In other words, it is a cost
BBT MAY/JUNE 2015 53
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