With the ever growing popularity of air travel as a primary mode of transportation in today’s society, airport facilities and airline operations are continually challenged to provide an excellent customer experience. A successful travel experience should provide a smooth journey to endorse end-users’ continued relationship with both the airport and airline carriers. However, with technology reliance ever increasing, operational functions have a complexity of system interdependencies. As such, it is becoming more difficult for airport back of house operations and passenger flows to function as the perfectly orchestrated symphony they were intended to be. With only one chance for an airport or airline carrier to have a good first impression and “get it right” on the opening day of a new facility, it is imperative that the readiness of the systems, processes and staff be fully tested and trialed multiple times over. With widely popular social media platforms acting as influential decision makers for customers in today’s society, the world may know immediately when a passenger enters the new facility on opening day, and whether they can do so seamlessly, with comfort and efficiency. Consequently, if passengers experience problems navigating through the facility, the first impression is one an airport may wish never occurred. With all these factors in mind, airports should consider the value of incorporating Operational Readiness and Transition (ORAT) into their capital development programs in the planning phase to ensure the design of new facilities aligns with the expected operational functionality of the airports and their stakeholders and the operational readiness of the facility, processes, systems and people is such that the customer experience is seamless so that the first impressions of a new facility are positive.
Opening of new facilities have historically been wrought with minor and major problems that have impacted openings from an operational and technical standpoint. Problems such as system malfunctions and lack of contingency plans to deploy in times of operational inefficiency have delayed openings or caused “false starts,” where the facilities opened for brief periods of time and later had to close in order to rectify issues that occurred. Lack of staff familiarization of the facilities, inadequate or lack of training, or lack of trialing of the processes and procedures, systems and equipment have proven to have had negative results on startup operations.
Many in and outside of the aviation industry are familiar with several airport/terminal openings that were less than successful. These cautionary tales tell the story of activation plans that did not translate into operational efficiency. The problems with baggage handling, staff movement and system failures airports and terminals have faced could have been avoided had a thorough and comprehensive ORAT program been a part of the project early on, from the planning stage where maximum benefits would have been realized through the ability to influence design and align it with the operational requirements of the stakeholders. Many European, Middle East and Asian airports, and several airlines have embraced ORAT and require it to be incorporated into their capital development programs from the onset. The U.S. airports though, have been slow to do so. Many have had “Activation” programs tied to their new facility openings, and brought them on in the later phases of project development but it’s only been recent that the idea of an ORAT program being a precursor to the design of new airport/airline facilities in the U.S. is grabbing hold.
Although activation has been popular amongst many airports in the U.S., it is limited in the benefits it provides to airports or airlines through their development programs when they are aiming at improving passenger experience and operational functionality. Reason being, activation usually comes into play after the project has already been designed and is under construction. Intended to be a program that is intended to train staff on how to operate the building as it was designed, activation plans lack the ability to influence the operational functionality and customer experience.
A comprehensive ORAT program engages stakeholders early in the planning phase of projects to fully understand their respective operations. It is at this time that airports and airlines are able to capture operational concepts and defined key performance indicators (KPIs). These KPI metrics are the basis for setting and maintaining standards of customer experience, something the U.S. airports are only now recognizing as customer experience is becoming an area of competitiveness for airports and airlines alike. The benefit of ORAT developing the Concepts of Operations Plan and incorporating KPIs before the design begins is for operational change orders to be minimized. ORAT works with the airport/airline and the design team to ensure the manner in which the airport and all the stakeholders plan to operate are captured in the design criteria for the new facilities. This includes the way they will incorporate any new technologies and improved levels of service in their operation Thus, when keys are handed over, the facility is designed (and ready) to meet the operational requirements of the airport and its stakeholders. How many of the readers have worked in facilities and thought to themselves “What were they thinking when they designed this place?”
ORAT can be deployed at various phases in different projects, but the true cost benefits and influences are achieved early in the project. One of the critical characteristics of any ORAT program, including those used at other non-airport facilities such as hospitals and new stadiums, is that it can seamlessly fit into any project development. If ORAT is brought onboard after construction begins, the ability to influence design and address lifecycle costs of systems and equipment is minimal to negligent. However, the operational concepts that ORAT identifies through early stakeholder engagement are considered and can be captured during the planning phase of a project. Should stakeholder concerns not be known and addressed until after construction begins, modifications to the design may result in unwanted change orders or not be captured at all.
Similarly, bringing in the facilities maintenance and IT stakeholders early on will allow for cost assessments of the systems and equipment being specified. As a rule of thumb, 75 percent of equipment costs comes after the first day of its operation in the form of operating costs versus the 25 percent cost spent in the procurement of it. Involving an ORAT Program early on allows for consideration and analysis of the lifecycle costs to be identified before procurement of those systems/equipment, thus allowing for possibly more informed decisions regarding the selection of systems/equipment resulting in long-term savings.
Two areas that give program and construction managers anxiety are schedule and cost. They are concerned that the ORAT processes might delay the construction schedule and/or they might result in change orders. Examples of successful ORAT efforts show otherwise. In fact, ORAT is designed to reduce change orders for operational and maintenance reasons due to its involvement during the planning phase when the operations and maintenance stakeholder concerns are presented and incorporated into the design, rather than later when a possibility of a change order presents itself.
ORAT does not impact construction schedules. Rather, it is integrated into the project schedule and adjusts as or if the project schedule does. One point to emphasize, substantial completion (project handover) should not coincide with the opening of a facility. Often, a project schedule ties commissioning sign-off with substantial completion. When commissioning activities are complete, the trialing of equipment, systems and processes still needs to occur, which also validates the training and staff knowledge. How much time beyond substantial completion is given for trialing is based on the types of systems being trialed, the complexity of the facility, the level of assurance, and validity of the procedures that as they are written and they are correct and aligned with the design of a new facility. Often times, though, there are additional pressures to open new facilities by a specific date, whether they are operationally related, political or contractual. These influences may impact the number, repetitiveness, and level of assuredness that the systems and processes will work.
With terminals being more and more reliant upon technology, the opportunity for failures to occur is high. An ORAT program teaches staff through series of workshops how to utilize and operate the technologies to their advantage, so they can make processes such as self-bag check-in, self-boarding machines, and even future self-boarding, benefit the customer experience levels being sought. ORAT teams work with the stakeholders to also identify the training requirements and develops a familiarization, induction, and training program, aligned with the O&M training requirements of the contractors and ensures staff are familiarized with the new facility and they are properly trained on the new systems and procedures.
Immediately upon opening a new terminal or other facility, a critical time exists that must be monitored. As systems and equipment are being exercised during a “settling in” period, there is a high likelihood that things can go wrong. Also, usually there are still on-going construction activities as well as punch-list items being resolved. Post opening support is important to operational continuity and mitigation efforts. ORAT should remain mobilized for a couple of months after facility opening to provide necessary support to the stakeholders as well as to the contractors to assist with mitigation efforts as needed and to assist with close-out of any operational issues.
Although ORAT can take different approaches to implementations to meet the unique needs of each particular airport or airline, one key component that the airport or airline must always consider is how they foresee their staff’s involvement in the development and management of ORAT activities. Are they, or can they be, fully committed to ORAT 100 percent of the time, and if so, who will take over their day job? This question is critical for airports/airlines to contemplate, because full commitment by utilizing staff or outside consulting services is the only way to achieve complete readiness success.
A number of airports around the globe have opened new terminals in which they have used their own staff to conduct the operational readiness activities and have been successful in preparing staff, facilities and all the associated processes, whereas others have not. Some airports have been fortunate to have the resources to commit staff full-time to operational readiness activities for current and future development projects and benefit from lessons learned from the previous projects. Another approach that airports/airlines have taken is hiring consulting firms to provide an ORAT end-to-end program. Such a program still requires an investment of staff to provide subject matter expertise of their operation. This approach typically takes a hybrid form where the airport/airline has subject matter experts who know how the operation works and will regularly engage with the ORAT advisors to define the operational concepts for carry over into the design of a new facility and participate in the procedural development and trials.
A hybrid approach is where airports/airlines engage in a pseudo in-house/approach to ORAT by employing their staff. In certain situations, this works (considering a learning curve), but only if the staff are 100 percent dedicated to the process and willing to roll up their sleeves and actively participate. Often times, the staff do not have the time nor the interest, particularly when the project schedule does not call for opening until three to four years later. If an airport/airline has a capital development program that includes a number of major projects coinciding with each other, there is benefit to assigning staff full-time to ORAT. They are the subject matter experts who know the operation best and who will gain lessons learned from each project, carrying them through to a subsequent project. A consulting firm with experienced experts to support the ORAT program and assist in developing the staff to carry out the efforts can be beneficial; otherwise, airports/airlines may be “shooting in the dark” and “missing the target” due to not having an operational readiness knowledge base or “lessons learned.”
As airports and airlines consider their capital development programs that include facility redevelopment or new facilities, they should be investing in an assurance program that their facilities (and staff) will not only be operationally ready at the time of opening but also as important, be fit for the purpose. By moving beyond basic “Activation” and including ORAT as an end-to-end service, history has proven that the benefits for doing so far outweigh the potential consequences of not.
Michael McElvaney has over 35 years’ experience in executive management positions in the operation of airports and the operational readiness of new airport facilities. Michael is a Director at LeighFisher, a wholly owned subsidiary of Jacobs, where he leads the firm’s ORAT practice. He is currently providing executive level advisory support to Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA) in the establishment of Airport Operational Readiness (AOR) for the LAX multi- billion-dollar capital development program. Previously, Michael served as Vice President of Airport Operations for Qatar Airways, where he managed the operation of the new Hamad International Airport. He simultaneously Chaired the Governance Oversite Committee for Operational Readiness program for the new airport, encompassing 130 new facilities.
