U NIVERSITY OF C OLOGNE Department of Business Policy & Logistics Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Werner Delfmann The relationship between airlines and airports: Th l ti hi b t i li d i t An analysis of dimensions and success factors to improve cooperation and efficiency to improve cooperation and efficiency Bjoern Goetsch, Jens Ruehle & Sascha Albers Department of Business Policy & Logistics University of Cologne
U NIVERSITY OF C OLOGNE Department of Business AGENDA Policy & Logistics Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Werner Delfmann 1 1 Introduction Introduction 2 Theoretical Framework: Extended IMP Model 3 Airport-Airline Model Empirical Study 4 Preliminary Results Preliminary Results 5 5 G.A.R.S. Berlin 2008 - Bjoern Goetsch
U NIVERSITY OF C OLOGNE Department of Business Introduction Policy & Logistics Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Werner Delfmann The ongoing liberalization and privatization leads to sustainable change in � the relationship between airports and airlines A Among other effects, these developments result primarily in a wider range th ff t th d l t lt i il i id � of strategic options for both actors Due to increased air traffic demand and pressure on costs and capacity, p p y, � the importance of this relationship will increase significantly Another problem area arises from the very different (service) requirements � of the carriers (LCC vs FSC) and substantial regional (international) of the carriers (LCC vs. FSC) and substantial regional (international) differences in the industry � In most cases the current relationship can be characterized as problematic or at least as difficult � A solution to this issue can only be reached by joint efforts G.A.R.S. Berlin 2008 - Bjoern Goetsch
U NIVERSITY OF C OLOGNE Department of Business Introduction (2) Policy & Logistics Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Werner Delfmann � „In all cases, [airport] operators will have to work much more closely with the carriers to optimize joint interfaces and to leverage cost and revenue synergies.“ y g (BCG Report, 2004) � „From the customers’ point of view, closer cooperation will be increasingly necessary for the simple reason that if customers don’t have a good necessary for the simple reason that if customers don t have a good perception of the situation (…), it will obviously impact on the image of both partners.“ (Spinetta, CEO AirFrance & IATA, in: Jarach: Airport Marketing, 2005) (Spinetta CEO AirFrance & IATA in: Jarach: Airport Marketing 2005) � „…, thus establishing a solid basis for a strong partnership between airlines and the airport.“ (Gerber, Vice President LH Aviation Infrastructure Management, in: JATM, (G b Vi P id t LH A i ti I f t t M t i JATM 2002) G.A.R.S. Berlin 2008 - Bjoern Goetsch
U NIVERSITY OF C OLOGNE Department of Business Literature Review Policy & Logistics Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Werner Delfmann � Although there is extensive research on all forms of cooperation, the airport-airline relationship in general has been almost neglected � S Single aspects of the relationship are dominating the research field, f f e.g. slot allocation mechanisms or pricing issues � Existing research may also take a very general approach to describe the g y y g pp relation, e.g. Graham (2002) � A systematic analysis and configurational propositions are rather limited [Exceptions: Fuhr & Beckers 2006; Albers Koch Ruff (2005); [Exceptions: Fuhr & Beckers, 2006; Albers, Koch, Ruff (2005); Gillen, Lall (2004); Francis, Fidato, Humphreys (2003)] � Due to its increasing importance, the topic tends to be an issue on industry conferences (e.g. London 2004, Orlando 2005) G.A.R.S. Berlin 2008 - Bjoern Goetsch
U NIVERSITY OF C OLOGNE Department of Business AGENDA Policy & Logistics Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Werner Delfmann 1 1 Introduction Introduction 2 Theoretical Framework: Extended IMP Model 3 Airport-Airline Model Empirical Study 4 Preliminary Results Preliminary Results 5 5 G.A.R.S. Berlin 2008 - Bjoern Goetsch
U NIVERSITY OF C OLOGNE Department of Business Research Logic Policy & Logistics Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Werner Delfmann � Goal is to conceptually grasp the relationship and to uncover major mechanisms and interactions between determinants and elements of the very complex relationship elements of the very complex relationship � Model as diagnostic as well as design tool for the relationship � Two classes of variables � Contingency variables: given, cannot be influenced directly, but considerable influence on the relationship Design variables: directly adjustable by management decisions, � i.e. they offer opportunities to shape relationship � � Focus on design variables and propositions Focus on design variables and propositions � Model based on IMP interaction model (Hakansson, 1982) G.A.R.S. Berlin 2008 - Bjoern Goetsch
U NIVERSITY OF C OLOGNE Department of Business Extended IMP Interaction Model Policy & Logistics Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Werner Delfmann Environment fixed variables Actors Atmosphere adjustable variables Interaction Process Strategic Outcome Strategic Outcome G.A.R.S. Berlin 2008 - Bjoern Goetsch
U NIVERSITY OF C OLOGNE Department of Business AGENDA Policy & Logistics Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Werner Delfmann 1 1 Introduction Introduction 2 Theoretical Framework: Extended IMP Model 3 Airport-Airline Model Empirical Study 4 Preliminary Results Preliminary Results 5 5 G.A.R.S. Berlin 2008 - Bjoern Goetsch
U NIVERSITY OF C OLOGNE Department of Business Overview of Hypotheses Policy & Logistics Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Werner Delfmann ATMOSPHERE INTERACTION PROCESS ENVIRONMENT Interdependence p Specific Investments p Uncertainty Trust Trust Institutionalization Institutionalization regular contingency variables and relations and relations Commitment Joint Action italics design variables and relations Relationship Performance STRATEGIC OUTCOME G.A.R.S. Berlin 2008 - Bjoern Goetsch
U NIVERSITY OF C OLOGNE Department of Business AGENDA Policy & Logistics Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Werner Delfmann 1 1 Introduction Introduction 2 Theoretical Framework: Extended IMP Model 3 Airport-Airline Model Empirical Study 4 Preliminary Results Preliminary Results 5 5 G.A.R.S. Berlin 2008 - Bjoern Goetsch
U NIVERSITY OF C OLOGNE Department of Business Data Collection and Methodology Policy & Logistics Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Werner Delfmann � The sample was drawn from the TOP 200 airlines as ranked by Airline Business in 2007 (see Airline Business, Vol. 23, No 8) No. 8) � Key informants: Senior airline manager of respective hub or base airport � Response rate: Approx. 33% (n=65) � A structural equation modeling (SEM) approach has been chosen to evaluate both error in construct measurement and chosen to evaluate both error in construct measurement and error in hypothesized relations PLS approach (in contrast to LISREL) due to small sample pp ( ) p � size and the use of formative and second order constructs G.A.R.S. Berlin 2008 - Bjoern Goetsch
U NIVERSITY OF C OLOGNE Department of Business Sample Description Policy & Logistics Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Werner Delfmann Business Models Geographical Spread Full Service Carrier Europe Low Cost Carrier North America Regional Carrier Asia Revenue 2007 (in mio. USD) R 2007 (i i USD) P Passenger (in mio.) (i i ) < 1,000 1,000 < 10 10 1,000 - 10,000 10 - 40 > 10,000 > 40 G.A.R.S. Berlin 2008 - Bjoern Goetsch
U NIVERSITY OF C OLOGNE Department of Business Structural Model – Direct Effects Policy & Logistics Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Werner Delfmann ATMOSPHERE INTERACTION PROCESS 0,200 * ENVIRONMENT Interdependence p Specific Investments p 0,222 * - 0,083 n.s. Uncertainty - 0,147 n.s. 0,457 *** 0,515 *** , Trust Trust Institutionalization Institutionalization 0 242 ** 0,242 ** 0,199 * 0,456 *** 0,404 ** 0,563 *** 0,136 n.s. regular contingency variables and relations and relations Commitment Joint Action 0,471 *** italics design variables and relations 0,182 n.s. Relationship Performance n.s. = not significant * = significant at 0,05 level ** = significant at 0,01 level STRATEGIC OUTCOME *** = significant at 0,001 level g , G.A.R.S. Berlin 2008 - Bjoern Goetsch
U NIVERSITY OF C OLOGNE Department of Business Structural Model – Indirect and Total Effects Policy & Logistics Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Werner Delfmann Direct Effect ATMOSPHERE INTERACTION PROCESS Institutionalization – Specific Investments p Relationship Performance: 0 136 n.s. Relationship Performance: 0,136 n.s. 0,457 *** Indirect Effects Trust Trust Institutionalization Institutionalization via Trust: 0,214 ** 0,456 *** 0,242 ** 0,563 *** via Specific Investments: 0,111 * via Joint Action: 0,071 n.s. 0,136 n.s. Joint Action 0,471 *** (results based on Sobel-Test) 0,182 n.s. Total Effect Relationship Performance Institutionalization – STRATEGIC OUTCOME Relationship Performance: 0,532 *** p , G.A.R.S. Berlin 2008 - Bjoern Goetsch
U NIVERSITY OF C OLOGNE Department of Business AGENDA Policy & Logistics Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Werner Delfmann 1 1 Introduction Introduction 2 Theoretical Framework: Extended IMP Model 3 Airport-Airline Model Empirical Study 4 Preliminary Results Preliminary Results 5 5 G.A.R.S. Berlin 2008 - Bjoern Goetsch
Recommend
More recommend
