Action Plan for Improving Passenger Process
Operation at Toronto Pearson International
Airport
Table of Contents
1 Background
1.1 Current Situation
2 Organization Goals
2.1 Strategic Goals Alignment
3 Proposal
3.1 Performance Analysis
4 Key Objectives
4.1 Improve Passenger Check-in Time
4.2 Improve Security Screening Time
4.3 Improve Aircraft Boarding Time
5 Action Plan
6 Further Operation Improvement Considerations
7 Conclusion and Recommendations
Reference List:
1 Background
The operation management team in
the airport terminals is faced with the day to day challenges of providing
quality, reliable and cost effective services that are better, cheaper and more
responsive to the passenger’s needs at Toronto Pearson International Airport. It
is sometimes difficult for them to be able to apply strategic concepts into
service processes that can provide competitive advantage to the Greater Toronto
Airports Authority (GTAA) and add value to its customers. As an operation
management consultant, the author is tasked to assist the Customer and Terminal
Services (CTS) organization to provide a viable action plan to improve a key process
in the terminal operations. The author’s intent here is to enhance operation
performance in the Customer and Terminal Services organization in order to gain
competitive advantage for the GTAA and achieve corporate sustainability in the
airport industry.
1.1 Current Situation
As you are aware, the Customer and Terminal
Services (CTS) organization is responsible for airport terminal operation
management. CTS
role in the GTAA is to provide terminal operation management through various
delivery services and processes. CTS oversee the day to day operation of both
terminals at the airport, terminal one and three. Their areas of operations
include resource management unit, baggage operations, operations systems, facility
and slot allocation services, and call center (GTAA Portal, 2015).
Through performance measuring; as
depicted in section 3.1 below, CTS has identified some pain points and bottlenecks
in their operation’s departure passenger flow process figure A below. Passenger
processing will require some serious attention because current performance
measurements; as it relates to passenger check-in, passenger security screening
and passenger onboarding; in terms of the quality of service, the speedy
process of passengers and reliability on
the services, are not in good standings Terminal Operation Director (2015). From interviews performed and the rating
survey conducted, it was clear as to the challenges and issues faced by CTS
terminal operation’s passenger flow process.
Figure: A Passenger Flow – Departure Process Flow Diagram
These pain points and bottlenecks
identified, includes the following:
- There is overcapacity in process spaces when there is an increase in passenger volume, primarily in the check-in lobby.
- Passenger wait-time can sometimes be too long in all passenger security screening areas.
- Unplanned demand interruptions due to change requirements in capacity by the airlines, due to introduction of new airline services, and Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) and Canadian Air Transport Security Authority (CATSA).
- Interoperability is a problem working with different groups at the airport. It can sometimes be time consuming and it slows the passenger flow process.
- There is inconsistency across the various airport group’s procedures and processes. This can sometimes cause repeat work and slow decision making.
1 Organization Goals
Along with key strategic
partners, the airlines namely Air Canada and West Jet, Canada Border Services
Agency (CBSA), United States Customs & Border Protection (USCBP), Canadian
Air Transport Security Authority (CATSA) and NAV Canada, the GTAA has a
strategic vision for the Toronto Pearson International Airport to be the best
Airport in the world making a difference connecting the world Toronto Pearson
(2015). The GTAA is mandated to ensure that aviation services at the Toronto
Pearson in aligned with the growing population of the Greater Toronto Area
(GTA) and one of the organization’s strategic objectives is to enhance
passenger experience at the Airport. It is apparent that in order to satisfy the
GTAA and its business partner’s customers, providing passenger satisfaction and
to address overall service level and operation agility, CTS would need to
achieve their operation goals and objectives in order to support the
organization strategic goals and objectives.
1.1 Strategic Goals Alignment
Customer Terminal Services (CTS)
strategic goal is to improve passenger flow by improving passenger processing
in key areas of the airport operation. Although there are many issues
identified the focus will be on wait time for passengers. The intent here is to
eliminate passenger traffic bottlenecks and eliminate or reduce passenger wait
time. CTS’s strategic goal as seen in the relationship matrix Table: 1 below shows
alignment to the GTAA’s strategic objective of enhancing passenger experience. The
author believes that it is important to link operation improvement to strategic
objective as the purpose of strategic objective is to better the operation
performance and in turn better the operating market (Cooper & Edgett, 2010),
in this case better the operating market by enhancing passenger experience.
The author would agree with Slack,
Brandon-Jones & Johnson (2014) that without a clear strategic directive,
operation management cannot properly target key performance indicators.
Table: 1 Relationship Matrix - Goal Alignment
1 Proposal
The author is proposing to
enhance passenger experience at the Toronto Pearson Airport by improving
passenger flow, specifically passenger processing in the areas of passenger
check-in, passenger security screening and passenger aircraft boarding. The
plan is to eliminate bottle neck in the process by reducing passenger wait
time. The author’s proposal is based on a just-in-time (JIT) lean principle
that is common in the service industry and has surfaced in the aviation
industry. JIT is a pull strategy for controlling the logical flows of material or
resources in manufacturing or service planning and control environments (Cochran
& Kaylani, 2008) and (Abuhilal,
Rabadi & Sousa-Poza, 2006). JIT or lean is an effective way of efficiently executing
demand planning Cochran & Kaylani (2008) as it relates to how fast
passengers get processed at the airport. In the author’s opinion, valuing
passenger time can contribute to the result of achieving airport operation
efficiency. For instance, if Toronto
Pearson were to implement JIT or lean
principles, which can provide an efficient logical and smooth passenger flow
process, this can result in a hassle free consumption for the Toronto Pearson
passengers improving the quality of service through efficient management of
passenger time.
Reasons for proposing this
approach can be deduced from the performance analysis section below.
1.1 Performance Analysis
As an operation management
consultant, understanding the current operation performance is necessary to
determine how to approach the improvement efforts, such as the urgency,
direction and priorities for improving the process (Slack, Brandon-Jones &
Johnston, 2014). CTS operation
management should keep in mind that operation performance objectives such as
quality, speed, dependability, flexibility and cost, contributes to achieving
excellent customer satisfaction in the service offered. Quality and speed is highly
influenced by visibility as it relates to customer satisfaction. For instance,
when visibility is high, customer satisfaction is perceived through quality of
a service (Slack, Brandon-Jones & Johnston, 2014). What this means is that
quality of service could be determined by the speed of the service that is provided
as in the case of an airport environment.
A performance analysis was
completed as a prerequisite to understand the good, bad or indifferent in the
operation’s process. As seen in Figure B and Table 2 below, performance
measurements indicated there are issues with regards to quality of services as
it relates to the performance of the operation’s passenger flow process. Although passenger processing performance
appears adequate on the rating scale in Table 2, it did not meet the importance
factor on the scale. Delivery speed and delivery reliability of the process were
both rated poorly in their performance. Although delivery reliability has an importance
factor of 7 on the importance rating, delivery speed of the process is even
higher with an importance factor of 9 the highest on the scale.
Table: 2 - Rating Scale
Rating Scale Key:
x= Importance Rating
+= Performance Rating
Importance/Performance Scale
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
|
Quality of service
derived from the process
|
+
|
x
|
|||||||
Delivery speed of
the process/service
|
+
|
x
|
|||||||
Delivery Reliability of
the process/service
|
+
|
x
|
|||||||
Delivery Flexibility of
the process/service
|
+
|
x
|
|||||||
Operating Cost of the
process/Service
|
+
|
x
|
|||||||
If you examine the data in Figure
B current operation performance had a focus on process quality and flexibility,
and very little emphasis was placed on process speed, operating cost or the
dependability of the process. You will also see that future performance targets
have now been adjusted to align with Customer Terminal Service (CTS) operation
objective of improving passenger processing.
Figure: B Polar Diagram on Operation Performance
Current Performance
Measured Future Performance
Target
The data shows that there is a
great need to improve on process speed, which will improve the quality of
service for the passengers, supporting the author’s early point about the
perception of quality through speedy service. For CTS to meet their future
operation performance targets of quality and speed as seen in Figure B, thus
improving the passenger flow process, the author recommends that CTS focus
should be on agility which is derived from speedy delivery of process or
services Slack, Brandon-Jones & Johnston (2014).
1 Key Objectives
The key objectives that supports
CTS strategic goal of improving passenger flow and improving passenger
processing are as follows:
1.1 Improve Passenger Check-in Time
From the author’s research on
industry best practices and his analysis, he recommends that CTS invest and
focus on initiatives and activities that relate to the proper flow sequencing
at each passenger processing points and also on the design and layout aspects of
the service-scape (Rosenbaum & Massiah, 2011) and (Rondinellie, et al.,
2010). CTS operation management should consider rearranging the check-in lobby by
decreasing the amount of check in agent counters and replace and increase with process
technology namely check-in Kiosks. From a JIT or lean perspective Pheng, Arain
& Fang (2011), stated that waste of space is root cause for poor process
flow at an airport and added that this is a result of poor design of spatial
layout. Further, airport operation management should redesign the space to be
fully utilized.
In addition, by doing this, the author believes
it will improve the functionality providing a smoother operation with
flexibility to address unexpected changes like capacity growth. Directly this
will impact the speed in operation performance in a positive way, whereas an
increase in the process technology provides more automation and removing
check-in counter offers more space to address capacity growth. The overall intent
here is to improve passenger check-in speed by 50% by reducing wait time by 15
minutes.
1.2 Improve Security Screening Time
According to Terminal Operation
Director (2015), security screening
can take up to 20 minutes from entry point to exit point during high volume in
passenger traffic. Whenever and wherever
possible in the terminals, the author suggests that CTS operation management
should consider investing in additional process technologies to provide more
automation in the passenger security screening process. CTS’s operation
management should consider the use of more innovative technologies which is a
common trend across the aviation industry.
Kamarudin (2015) believes that the adaptation rate of innovative
technologies in airport is increasing, as the need to automate and provide more
efficient method to service passenger, like self-service is growing. Automation
and passenger self-service is a good recipe for increasing speed of service and
will in the long run provide better customer experience at the airport. Automation in the case of advance technologies
for the process could improve security screening by 75 % reducing wait time by
15 minutes. This however, may have some constraints due to industry regulatory
compliances with regards to the type of security screen equipment that can be
used (IATA, 2014a).
1.3 Improve Aircraft Boarding Time
To address aircraft boarding time
the author recommends that CTS operation management work closely with the
airlines to improve their passenger boarding process, which could improve
aircraft boarding time depending on the aircraft boarding model uses.
In a case study illustrated by Slack, Brandon-Jones & Johnston
(2014) about operation planning and control activities which include
scheduling, loading, sequencing and monitoring and control, proper loading and
sequencing technique can speed up the process and save time based on an
efficient method of boarding. This supports (Rondinellie, et al., 2010) point in section 4.1 on proper flow
sequencing required at each passenger processing point. Of the three aircraft
boarding or loading models below, block method; which is group boarding from
back to front, Wilma method; which is one by one boarding from back to front
and Steffen method; which is random boarding, Slack, Brandon-Jones &
Johnston (2014) case study concluded
that through proper sequencing, the Wilma method reduce the boarding time from
7 minutes to 3.36 minutes, a process improvement of about 50%.
Figure: C Aircraft Boarding Models
Continuous improvement of business
process such as the aircraft boarding process, contributes towards operation
management achieving reliability, speed and efficiency. Also, continuous
process improvement provides the ability to adapt to change efficiently and in
less time and with less cost (Singh, 2012) & (Felkel & Klann, 2012). In
addition, the author would also suggest that CTS operation management use
innovative technology as mentioned by Kamarudin (2015) such as automated
passenger boarding (self-serve) system to support the aircraft boarding process.
Self-serve systems help speed up the process, whereas passenger would be able
to board at their leisure. The objective here is to improve aircraft boarding
by 50% thereby reducing aircraft departure by 20 minutes.
1 Action Plan
The table below outlines Customer Terminal Services’ detail action
plan geared to meet their objective and achieving their goal.
Table: 3 Detailed Action Plan
Objectives
|
Status
|
Resource Assigned
|
Start Date
|
End Date
|
Estimated Budget
|
Achievements
|
Improve Passenger Check-In Time By 50%
|
||||||
Implement Tool to measure wait Time
|
Not Started
|
Jacky Operation Manager and Myron IT Manager
|
29-Sep-15
|
29-Mar-16
|
$500,000.00
|
Ability to provide quality and dependable planning and
allocation of airport resources
|
Implement Tool Capturing Space Usage Activities
|
Not Started
|
Tom Manager Design & Planning, Jacky and Myron
|
29-Sep-15
|
29-Mar-16
|
$350,000.00
|
Achieve airport operation optimization of terminal providing
efficiency and effective use of space
|
Check-In Process refinement Initiative
|
Not Started
|
Tom Manager Design & Planning and Jacky Operation Manager
|
29-Sep-15
|
29-Dec-15
|
$ -
|
Achieve process reliable, speed and efficiency. Ability to
quickly and efficiently adapt to changing conditions with less time and cost
|
Check-in Counter Rearrange Initiative
|
Not Started
|
Jacky Operation Manager & Tom Manager Design
|
2-Jan-16
|
15-Jun-16
|
$ 750,000.00
|
Achieve airport operation optimization of terminal providing
efficiency and effective use of space
|
Kiosk Repositioning and Enhancement Initiative
|
Not Started
|
Jacky Operation Manager and Myron IT Manager
|
21-Mar-16
|
20-Aug-16
|
$ 1,000,000.00
|
Achieve airport operation optimization of terminal providing
efficiency and effective use of space
|
Mobile Application for check-in
|
Not Started
|
Jacky Operation Manager and Myron IT Manager
|
20-Sep-15
|
29-Mar-17
|
$ 450,000.00
|
Ability to provide fast, reliable and dependable service to
passengers
|
Total Cost:
|
$ 3,050,000.00
|
|||||
Improve Security Screen Time by 75 %
|
||||||
Security Screening Continuous Process Improvement
|
Not Started
|
Tom , Jacky & Phil Airport Business Liaison
|
29-Sep-15
|
29-Dec-15
|
$ -
|
Achieve process reliable, speed and efficiency. Ability to
quickly and efficiently adapt to changing conditions with less time and cost
|
Implement New Body Scanner System
|
Not Started
|
Jacky , Phil and Myron IT Manager
|
29-May-17
|
29-Mar-18
|
$2,500,000.00
|
Ability to provide fast, reliable and dependable service to
passengers
|
Total Cost:
|
$
2,500,000.00
|
|||||
Improve Aircraft Boarding Time by 50 %
|
||||||
Aircraft Boarding Process Refinement Initiative
|
Not Started
|
Jacky & Phil Airport Business Liaison
|
29-Sep-15
|
29-Dec-15
|
$ -
|
Achieve process reliable, speed and efficiency. Ability to
quickly and efficiently adapt to changing conditions with less time and cost
|
Implement passenger boarding self-serve system
|
Not Started
|
Jacky, Phil and Myron IT Manager
|
29-Sep-16
|
29-Jul-17
|
$ 1,200,000.00
|
Ability to provide fast, reliable and dependable service to
passengers
|
Total Cost:
|
$1,200,000.00
|
|||||
Grand Total:
|
$6,750,000.00
|
With the implementation of the above-mentioned
action plan seen, Customer Terminal Service (CTS) operation management will see
improvements in the passenger flow process as they relate to the three key
objectives identified. The activities describe in the action plan above would
result in CTS operation management abilities to reduce wait time by being
efficient in key operation areas passenger check-in, passenger security screening
and passenger boarding. Implementing tools to measure wait time and space usage
would contribute to the optimization of the passenger check-in, security
screening and aircraft boarding process. As you know, Toronto Pearson serves
approximately 110,000 passengers daily on average. During seasonal peaks or
demand fluctuation at certain time of the day, passenger processing can
increase or decrease in demand. According to Karlaftis (2008) if demand becomes
high in services due to seasonal trends, operations managers should be in a
position to respond through effective long term and short term planning. Proper
planning can anticipate service increase derived from trendy daily or seasonal
peak times. To control these demand fluctuations operation managers should have
inventory or stocks already available. In the case of airport passenger
processing, additional staff such as, seasonal workers and extract resource or
equipment should be on standby. This is why it is important to have tools in
the environment that can measure passenger activity patterns. CTS operation
management would now be able to plan better and become flexible in addressing
capacity growth and the allocation of airport resources.
CTS operation management will
achieve process reliability, speed and quality through the re-design and layout
of space and continuous improvement of check-in and aircraft boarding process
refinement initiatives. An
airport should design a service layout with a combination of fixed and
functional layout type. Airports process types are categorized as mass service,
and on a volume-variety scale, this would indicate high volume activities (Kamarudin,
2015). Passenger flow would then be optimized through how the operation process
positions passengers for transition throughout the airport from check-in to
boarding. Therefore, the repositioning of check-in counters and Kiosks play a
vital role of managing high volume activities in the fastest time possible. As
quoted by Manager of Planning and terminal design, ‘the most efficient airport
is when a passenger from curb drop off to boarding on the aircraft, travels the
shortest possible distance in the shortest possible time ’ Manager of Planning & Terminal Design (2015)
In addition the implementation of
process technologies like mobile self-check-in, state of the art body scanner
security screening systems and passenger boarding self-serve systems enhances
the passenger experience through fast reliable and dependable service. In order
to deliver an effective and efficient passenger flow process, the author
believes that it requires a combination of information processing technologies
that supports the process. Operation managers should ensure that these process
technologies fit the design structure of the operation and that they are able
to meet the needs of the process activities
Slack, Brandon-Jones & Johnston (2014). According to Marsillac & Roh (2014), service designs are always changing, and with these changes comes
process modification, which is accomplished by either developing people skills
or introducing more flexible and advanced process technology. In the initial
stages of the operation design, proper evaluation of process technologies can
ensure that technologies such as a check-in Kiosks at the airport can be easily
upgraded and relocated or has the ability to scale and increase its processing
capacity (Slack, Brandon-Jones & Johnston, 2014). This is reason enough for
Customer Terminal Service to start investing in process technologies that are
capable of supporting the passenger flow process and start looking ahead to new
technologies such as, biometric system, near field communication (NFC) and even
smartphones, which are destined to change airport operations design in
passenger processing (Kalakou, Psaraki-Kalouptsidi & Moura, 2015). Similar to (Kalakou,
Psaraki-Kalouptsidi & Moura, 2015) belief, the author believes that these
new and emerging technologies mentioned will become a contributing factor for
increasing the overall speed in airport passenger processing and in enhancing
the operation performance and the passenger experience.
1 Further Operation Improvement Considerations
Below are some operation improvements for Customer Terminals
Services (CTS) and the GTAA to consider.
Improvement Cycles - In the interest
of achieving continuous improvement in Customer Terminal Services operation
management, the author suggest the application of certain operation improvement
techniques. Improvement cycles as an example, is a method that use a
never-ending process of repeat questioning about how a process or activity is
working (Slack, Brandon-Jones & Johnston, 2014). One in particular called
the Why-why analysis, which states a problem and repeatedly ask why to every
reasons identified during the questioning until the questions cannot be
answered anymore. It is recommended that this be performed during the
improvement cycles and that CTS should consider using either the PDCA or DMAIC
cycle model as they are the most common in the industry. PDCA model involves a Planning stage – a Do stage – a Check stage
and an Act stage. Figure D below
illustrates.
Figure: D PDCA model
Another model that
can be used in improvement cycles is DMAIC as seen in Figure E below.
Figure: E DMAIC model
DMAIC addresses
operation problems by defining the problem to gain understanding around what
needs to be done; measuring or validating the problem; analyzing the problem to
understand the root cause; improving the problem developing ideas to address
root cause, and finally controlling to ensure that the problem is sustained and
then the cycle begins again (Slack, Brandon-Jones & Johnston, 2014).
Customer Centric Focus - The fact
that the GTAA strategic objective is to enhance passenger experience and the
passengers although indirectly, are our customer, CTS should become more customer
centric focused. According to Slack, Brandon-Jones & Johnston (2014), being
a customer centric organization means ensuring that everyone understands the
importance of meeting the requirements of the customer within reason. Customer
Terminal Services (CTS) has already taken on this mind set; hence the name of
the organization Customer Terminal
Services.
Total Quality Management - Total
Quality Management (TQM) is another area of focus to improve the operation
management excellence of CTS. The
author believes that having good quality management in an airport operation is
vital as it addresses concerns or complaints from passengers about the services,
so that operation management can focus on improving those services, and satisfy
the passenger needs and expectations. The author suggest that CTS should support quality assurance practices, as it promotes the
collective involvement of everyone, customer and business working together to
improve service quality. TQM is important as its primary goal is to put quality
at the center of an operation. It stresses on meeting the needs and expectations
of customers and focuses its improvements on the entire organization on getting
things right the first time (Bayo-Moriones, Bello-Pintado &
Merino-Diaz-de-Cerio, 2011). Further, implementing good quality management
practices like TQM reduces waste and contributes to the optimization and
efficiency of an operation Jabbour et al. (2014). Therefore, proper quality
management practices like Total Quality Management (TQM) and Airport Service
Quality (ASQ) are vital component for the success of the business.
Just-in-Time/Lean - The author would
like to reiterate and recommend using JIT or Lean as an approach to improve CTS
operation performance. Just-in-time (JIT) or Lean is an excellent strategy used
for process control and execution (Golhar & Stamm, 1991), and is relevant
in the airport industry. JIT focuses on continuous improvement; on overall
operation processes, uninterrupted flow; a strategic focus for the Customer
Terminal Services (CTS) as it relates to passenger flow, quality control;
standardizing practices and eliminating waste; which can save organization in
expenditures (Pheng, Arain & Fang, 2011).
Risk Management – Risk management involves identifying potential failures in an
operation, and understanding how to prevent these failures from occurring. The
author suggests that CTS operation management should have a plan or strategy to
mitigate, manage and recover from the effects of risk in the operation (Slack,
Brandon-Jones & Johnston, 2014), and failures that could affect the airport
operation such as; systems and technology and
building failure. As you are aware, Information Technology systems supports key
services used by airlines for checking in passengers namely passenger
processing. If these systems were to fail, or the building compromised it would
impact on the organization's ability to provide these services for the
airlines. Another risk to mitigate is environmental disruptions. Weather
related and or natural disasters events and political or terrorist activities
can have a severe impact on operation Carlisle (2015). The author recommend
that CTS be proactive and interactive when managing risk Khorsandi & Aven (2014), and invest in Enterprise Risk Management
(ERM) which is a framework for managing risk in airport environments (ACRP
Report 74, 2012).
Although the focus
is on Customer Terminal Service (CTS) operation management improvement, it is
important to note that in an airport environment such as Toronto Pearson, it is
a coordinated effort that leads to success.
Enterprise
Resource Planning - As part of an overall supply chain within Customer
Terminal Services (CTS) organization other business units such as the resource
management unit, baggage operations, slot allocation services, operation
systems and call center. They would likely contribute and are key success
factors in providing excellent operation management. CTS coordinate the efforts
of all these business units in term of resource allocation, baggage processing,
operation systems deployment and maintenance and problem and incident
management through their call center. Operation management should consider
using Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system to integrate all the different
business processes and provide up-to-date and real-time information (Hendricks, Signhal& Stratman, 2007).
ERP as explained by Hahn, Bragg & Shin (1988), is a system capable of
providing a method to meet passenger demands through identifying and addressing
capacity constraints and bottleneck problems typically seen at the airport
terminals. The goal here is to enhance the coordination
efforts of CTS’s business units and provide a better platform for delimitating
information and making decisions.
In addition,
an ERP system can also act as a central point for the entire airport supply
network in coordinating the planning and control efforts of the airlines, United
States Customs & Border Protection (USCBP), Canadian Air Transport Security
Authority (CATSA) and NAV Canada and other airport business partners. According
to Papatheodorou
(2005) planning and
control in airport operations can be improved using innovative process technologies like Enterprise Resource
Management (ERM) for collective planning, replenishing resources, and enhancing
the decision-making capabilities of the supply network. This is seconded by Duff et al. (2013). It is with this reason the author recommends
to extend the consideration of an ERP system to include the entire airport
supply network.
Supply
Network – Another improvement proposed is the relationship management of
the supply network within Toronto Pearson Airport. Toronto Pearson interacts
with and collaborates with a supply
network made up of the airlines such as
Air Canada and West Jet, CBSA, USCBP, CATSA and NAV Canada, Toronto Pearson
(2015), and managing these relationship
can be challenging, therefore the author recommends having a focus on supply
chain management to better understand the supply network relationships. Supply
chain management is about how businesses connect and coordinate efforts to
provide and deliver a service to meet customer demand. It is a strategic
alliance among business Roh, Hong & Min (2014), which involves the managing
of business to business (B2B) relationships (Slack, Brandon-Jones &
Johnston, 2014). The author suggests the
use of Customer Relationship Management (CRM) tools to help the responsiveness
and decision making of the supply chain network. This is a way to ensure optimum performance
and reliance in the supply chain (Duff et al., 2013).
1 Conclusion and Recommendations
Customer and Terminal Services
(CTS) operation management understands the need to provide quality, speedy,
flexible, reliable and cost effective services to passengers at the Toronto
Pearson Airport and plan to eliminate bottle necks in their process by reducing
passenger wait time. This action plan identified problems in CTS operation
management and has outlined clear objectives to enhance passenger experience by
improving passenger flow, in the areas of passenger check-in, security
screening and aircraft boarding, and has provided the means to achieve these
objectives. In addition, the author has presented an opportunity for CTS, and
has proposed operation management best practices to further improve the
terminal operations as well as the overall airport community or supply
network.
The performance analysis in
section 3.1 revealed that there were problems in the operation’s process as it
relates to the quality of service in the passenger flow process. The service
delivery speed resulting from the process was poor hence the need to improve
the process speed in the focus areas. The author believes that improving the
process speed will improve the quality of service for passengers who perceive
fast service as a quality and of great value to their needs. The author thinks
that CTS operation management can meet this operation performance target of
providing quality through speedy service, as it makes sense to be agile, due to
the visibility of the service; to
cite Slack, Brandon-Jones &
Johnston (2014), by passengers at
the airport.
The author recommends CTS
operations management to implement proper flow sequencing at every passenger
processing point to ensure proper process flow transition and should also
re-design the service-scape by re-arranging the check-in lobby reducing check
in agent counters and replace check-in Kiosks section 4.1. This makes sense to
the author as he believes it is going to improve the functional space and
provide flexibility to address capacity growth when needed.
The author believe this can be
determined by implementing tools to measure and optimize wait time and space in
passenger check-in, security screening and aircraft boarding process and
contributes to the planning and forecasting activities. This would allow
operation management to respond in an efficient and effective way of handling
demand fluctuation.
In addition, the author agrees
and supports the notion of investing more in process technologies especially in
the area of passenger security screening. Technology is always improving and
has become a growing trend across the aviation industry and could be a factor
for improving process speed. The author agrees with Kalakou,
Psaraki-Kalouptsidi & Moura (2015), that emerging technologies will have
significant influence on operation performance. Another recommendation by the
author is that CTS operation
management and the airlines should work together to improve passenger boarding
process. As seen in section 4.3 the author agrees that an efficient aircraft
boarding model could improve aircraft boarding time by 50%.
As an opportunity to continue to
improve the operation performance and the airport overall operation management
the author thinks that Customer Terminal Services (CTS) operation management
should apply certain operation improvement techniques using improvement cycle
model like PDCA or DMAIC to identify and
perform root cause analysis of problems in order to improvement them.
The author believes that a systematic approach to problem solving makes sense
when it comes to continuous improvement as explained throughout the sections of
this action plan.
With the GTAA strategic objective
to enhance passenger experience, CTS should become more customer centric
focused and foster this approach in the entire organization; having a general
understanding that everyone in the organization should have a focus of meeting
the needs of the customer within reason. This absolutely makes perfect sense
and compliments my earlier point about service visibility to passenger. A
passenger can see how you treat another passenger and will either see this as
quality or poor service.
The author; sees the concept of
just-in-time (JIT) or Lean relevant to the airport operation and suggest not
only CTS, but the entire GTAA to explore further. The author agrees with Golhar
& Stamm (1991) that it is an excellent strategy to be used for process
control and execution. This makes sense as JIT focuses on continuous
improvement, uninterrupted, quality control and eliminating waste. A saving
realized.
Risk management is another area
to further consider in operation improvement to be proactive in addressing
potential risks in the environment. CTS should look into using an Enterprise
Risk Management framework.
It makes sense to the author that
an Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system can be beneficial and add value to
the airport operation management. In the author’s experience and he is in
agreement with Hendricks, Signhal&
Stratman (2007) and Hahn, Bragg & Shin (1988) that an ERP system is
essential to coordinating real-time information within the organization and
supply network to make decisions and address operation problems.
Finally, the author proposes the use of a Customer Relationship
Management (CRM) tool as a way to improve operation performance. CRM can be used
to manage the airport community or supply network relationships. A supply
network such as the airport is complicated and poses a challenge for operation
management. In the author’s experience and Duff et al., (2013) agrees, CRM is
one way of ensuring optimum performance and reliance in a supply network.
Reference List:
Abuhilal, L,
Rabadi, G, & Sousa-Poza, A (2006), 'Supply chain inventory control: A
comparison among JIT, MRP, and MRP with information sharing using simulation', EMJ
- Engineering Management Journal, 18, 2, p. 51-57, [Online] Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edselc&AN=edselc.2-52.0-33748134815&site=eds-live&scope=site [Accessed 4 July 2015].
ACRP Report 74 (2012), 'Application of Enterprise Risk Management at Airports' Airport Cooperative Research Program [Online] Available at: http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/acrp/acrp_rpt_074.pdf [Accessed 12 July 2015]
Bayo-Moriones, A., Bello-Pintado, A. & Merino-Diaz-de-Cerio, J. (2011), 'Quality assurance practices in the global supply chain: the effect of supplier localization', International Journal Of Production Research, 49, 1, pp. 255-268, [Online] Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=55309724&site=eds-live&scope=site [Accessed 28 June 2015].
Carlisle, A. (2015), 'Airport business resilience: Plan for uncertainty and prepare for change', Journal Of Airport Management, 9, 2, pp. 118-132, [Online] Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=101822262&site=eds-live&scope=site [Accessed 10 July 2015].
Cochran, J. & Kaylani, H. (2008), 'Optimal design of a hybrid push/pull serial manufacturing system with multiple part types', International Journal Of Production Research, 46, 4, pp. 949-965, [Online] Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=27541566&site=eds-live&scope=site [Accessed 5 July 2015].
Cooper, R.G. & Edgett, S.J. (2010) ‘Developing a product innovation and technology strategy for your business’, Research Technology Management, 53 (3), pp. 33-40.[Online] Available from: http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=51197064&site=eds-live&scope=site [Accessed 23 April 2015]
Duffy, R., Fearne, A., Hornibrook, S., Hutchinson, K. & Reid, A. (2013), 'Engaging suppliers in CRM: The role of justice in buyer–supplier relationships', International Journal Of Information Management, 33, 1, pp. 20-27, [Online] Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lxh&AN=83872612&site=eds-live&scope=site [Accessed 29 June 2015].
Felkel, R. & Klann, D. (2012), 'Practice papers: Comprehensive passenger flow management at Frankfurt Airport', Airport Management, 6, 2, pp.107-124, [Online] Available at http://www.amorph.aero/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/JAM_6-2_p107-p124-2.pdf [Accessed 14 June 2015]
Golhar, D, & Stamm, C (1991), 'The just-in-time philosophy: A
literature review', International Journal Of Production Research, 29, 4, p.
657, [Online] Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=5781897&site=eds-live&scope=site [Accessed 4 July 2015].
GTAA Portal (2015) ‘About Customer & Terminal Services’ GTAA Internal
Portal
Hahn, C., Bragg, D. & Shin, D. (1988), 'Impact of the Setup Variable on Capacity and Inventory Decisions', Academy Of Management Review, 13, 1, pp. 91-103, [Online] Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=4306794&site=eds-live&scope=site [Accessed 27 June 2015].
Hendricks, K., Signhal, V. & Stratman, J. (2007) 'The impact of enterprise systems on corporate performance: A study of ERP, SCM, and CRM system implementation', Journal of Operations Management, 25 (1), pp. 65-82.[Online] Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edselp&AN=S0272696306000052&site=eds-live&scope=site [Accessed 02 July 2015]
IATA (2014a), 'Checkpoint of the future'[Online] Available at: https://www.iata.org/whatwedo/security/Documents/cof-executive-summary.pdf [Accessed 6 June 2015
Jabbour, A., Jabbour, C., Latan, H., Teixeira, A. & de Oliveira, J. (2014), 'Quality management, environmental management maturity, green supply chain practices and green performance of Brazilian companies with ISO 14001 certification: Direct and indirect effects', Transportation Research Part E, 67, pp. 39-51, [Online] Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edselp&AN=S1366554514000386&site=eds-live&scope=site [Accessed 28 June 2015].
Karlaftis, M. (2008)'Demand Forecasting in Regional Airports: Dynamic Tobit Models with Garch Errors', pp.100-111 [Online] Available from: http://www.tgl.ufrj.br/viisitraer/pdf/312.pdf [Accessed 19 June 2015]
Kamarudin, R. (2015), 'Managing Customer Expectation for Passenger Service at Airport', [Online] Available at: http://www.aci-siapac.aero/upload/page/832/photo/54dd7dc77dfb6.pdf [Accessed 15 June 2015]
Kalakou, S, Psaraki-Kalouptsidi, V, & Moura, F 2015, 'Future airport terminals: New technologies promise capacity gains', Journal Of Air Transport Management, 42, pp. 203-212, [Online] Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edselp&AN=S0969699714001392&site=eds-live&scope=site [Accessed 13 June 2015]
Khorsandi,
J. & Aven, T. (2014), 'A risk perspective supporting organizational efforts
for achieving high reliability', Journal Of Risk Research, 17, 7, pp. 871-884,
[Online] Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=96921354&site=eds-live&scope=site [Accessed 10 July 2015].
Manager of Planning & Terminal Design (2015) unstructured Interview [in person] Terminal Planning & Design Considerations, Interview by Leon Foster, 24th June 2015 EST 9:50.
Marsillac, E. & Roh, J. (2014), 'Connecting product design, process and supply chain decisions to strengthen global supply chain capabilities', International Journal Of Production Economics, 147, Part B, pp. 317-329, [Online] Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edselp&AN=S0925527313001758&site=eds-live&scope=site [Accessed 13 June 2015].
Papatheodorou, Y. (2005), 'The Price of Leanness', Industrial Management, 47, 1, pp. 8-13, [Online] Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=16019426&site=eds-live&scope=site [Accessed 26 June 2015].
Pheng, L., Arain, F. & Fang, J. (2011), 'Applying just-in-time principles in the delivery and management of airport terminal buildings', Built Environment Project & Asset Management, 1, 1, p. 104, [online] Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edb&AN=67080921&site=eds-live&scope=site [Accessed 6 July 2015].
Quality Manager Inteplast Group (2015) Unstructured Interview [Phone] How Inteplast adjust capacity, Interview by Leon Foster, 26th June 2015 EST 14:30.
Roh, J., Hong, P. & Min, H. (2014), 'Implementation of a responsive supply chain strategy in global complexity: The case of manufacturing firms', International Journal Of Production Economics, 147, Part B, pp. 198-210, [Online] Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edselp&AN=S0925527313001771&site=eds-live&scope=site [Accessed 23 June 2015]
Rosenbaum, M. & Massiah, C. (2011) 'An expanded servicescape perspective', Journal of Service Management, 22 (4), pp. 471-490. [Online] Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edswss&AN=000295710200003&site=eds-live&scope=site [Accessed 10th June 2015]
Rondinellie, S., et al. (2010) 'Airport Passenger Terminal Planning and Design' ACRP Report 25, 1, pp.1-299, [Online] Available at: http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/acrp/acrp_rpt_025v1.pdf [Accessed 14 June 2015]
Singh, P.
(2012), 'Management of Business Processes Can Help an Organization Achieve
Competitive Advantage', International
Management Review, 8, 2, pp. 19-26, [Online] Available at: http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liv.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=82157928&site=eds-live&scope=site13 [Accessed 13 June 2015].
Slack, N., Brandon-Jones, A. & Johnston, R. (2014) Operations management. 7th ed. Harlow: Pearson Education.
Terminal Operation Director (2015) structured Interview [in person] Terminal Operation Current Situation,
Interview by Leon Foster, 29th June 2015 EST 11:30.
Toronto Pearson (2015), 'Toronto Pearson Strategic Plan: How we're realizing our vision for Toronto Pearson
International Airport', [Online] Available at: http://www.torontopearson.com/uploadedFiles/GTAA/Content/About_GTAA/Strategy/Strategic_Plan/Strategic%20Plan%202011-Public.pdf [Accessed 15 June 2015]
No comments:
Post a Comment