《咨询管理战略组织项目麦肯锡工具评估 Benchma.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《咨询管理战略组织项目麦肯锡工具评估 Benchma.pdf（32页珍藏版）》请在taowenge.com淘文阁网|工程机械CAD图纸|机械工程制图|CAD装配图下载|SolidWorks_CaTia_CAD_UG_PROE_设计图分享下载上搜索。
1、- 0 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33Notes:Doc.Controlling: Doc.Controlling: Doc.Controlling: Doc.Controlling: Doc.Controlling: Doc.Controlling: Doc.Code No.:Project manager:(Last name, Title,first name)One-doc.Seiten:Korrekturen:Planung:Arbeitstage Client:Project number:Project title:Project start:Branch offic
2、e:Partner/Competence Center:Documentation title:Type of document (e.g. workshop):Date of issue/of presentation:Place where hard copy is filed:Resp. for preparation:Resp. for graphic:Automatische Trennung:Dokument zu-letzt geffnet am:Wednesday 7 de July de 19997:09 PMEinAusVorlagen:gutschlechtFaxmitt
3、elControlling inSammellisteeingegebenDatumProduktions-tageBereitschaft bentigt am: Nachtarbeit bentigt am: Wochenendarbeit am: Wann geht die Prsentation an den Kunden?Letzter Produktionstag am:2. Tag3. Tag4. Tag5. Tag6. Tag7. Tag8. TagAngemeldet am:Soll-Eingang am/um:Ist-Eingang am/um:1. Tagdocument
4、 INFOrmationAFRA-0220-97097-02-33358/97220Deprossex2525530304737541A 900002209701FRADr. GoedekingBenchmarking and Competitive Intelligencein Aviation: Utilising benchmarking to .Presentation by Harald Deprosse29./30. September 1997Sek. PavlovicDeprosseFRAx?- 1 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33Roland Berger & Pa
5、rtner GmbH International Management ConsultantsBarcelona Beijing Berlin Brussels Bucharest Budapest Buenos Aires Dsseldorf Frankfurt Hamburg Helsinki Hong Kong Kiev Lisbon LondonMadrid Milan Moscow Munich New York Paris Prague Riga Rome So Paulo Shanghai Stockholm Stuttgart Tel Aviv Tokyo ViennaBenc
6、hmarking and Competitive Intelligence in Aviation:Utilising benchmarking to increase the competitivenessof ground services for airlines and airportsPresentation by Harald Deprosse, Roland Berger & Partner,International Management Consultants, FrankfurtLondon, September 29./30. 1997- 2 -FRA-0220-9709
7、7-02-33A.Identifying how benchmarking can improve the competi- tiveness of ground handling providers4B.Solving the challenge of data collection11C.Using the right specialised techniques to create an apples to apples comparison 14D.Interpreting benchmarking results correctly to translate analysis int
8、o action27IndexPage- 3 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33The main challenge of any benchmarking is comparabilitySource: DilbertAS YOU REQUESTED, IBENCHMARKED OURCOMPANY AGAINST FIVE WORLD CLASS COMPANIESWHY CAN THEY MAKE A POTATO CHIP IN ONE SECOND BUT IT TAKES USMONTHS TO DEVELOPSOFTWARE ?I THINKTHEYOIL THECHIP
9、STHE COMPARISONS ARE IRRELEVANT BECAUSEWERE IN DIFFERENT INDUSTRIES BUT THAT DIDNT STOP ME- 4 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33A.Identifying how benchmarking can improve thecompetitiveness of ground handling providers- 5 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33Ground handling providers are faced with the need to changeProviders o
10、f groundhandling services areforced to improveefficiency andeffectivenessLiberalisation opensthe market to newentrants and fiercercompetitionLiberalisationThe flood of newtechnologies into themarket offers newpotential forcompetitive advantageTechnologyFalling yields atairlines increasepressure to r
11、educecostsCost and yieldsThe tastes andexpectations of theend customers arechangingand becoming moredemandingCustomer NeedsAirline hub strategieshave dramaticimplications for theground servicesworkloadHubbingHigh productivityand low costdemands of newownersPrivatisationA.- 6 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33Per
12、sonnel costs offer the greatest improvement potential in ground handlingSource: Roland Berger & Partner Interviews/analysisCost structure Aircraft HandlingCost structure Pax Handling75%12 %8 %5 %93 %3 %4 %Personnel costsPersonnel costsEquipment costsRent and realestate costsotherRent and realestate
13、costsotherA.- 7 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33The only question is how to leverage this potential personnel costproductivitywages/salaries?Improve productivity?Lower wages/salaries?A.- 8 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33 and to what extent Should I reduce head-count or wages or both? What is too much and what is too lit
14、tle?Mr. Xor$A.- 9 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33It is the aim of benchmarking to deliver these answersLoss-making ground handlerB 737Profitable ground handlerHow can he servicea B 737 with 2 people when I need 5?Mr. XWell, his employees earn less and they need less supervisionMr. BenchmarkA.B 737B 737- 10 -F
15、RA-0220-97097-02-33Whereby today we will focus entirely in benchmarking labour productivitySuccess factors in ground handling1994199519961997100908070-8,5 % CAGROut of scope!Cost managementTodays focusLabour productivityBenchmarking seeks to answer the questions: How to improve effectiveness? am I d
16、oing the right things? How to improve efficiency? am I doing the right things right?A.- 11 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33B.Solving the challenge of data collection- 12 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33Data collection is a long and delicate processB.Select theinterviewpartners Analyse available information sources (press
17、 research, appropriate annual reports etc.) Choose a list of benchmarking partners which can be relevant to the analysis1Develop aQuestionnaire Clearly indentify what you want to know and match it with what your counterpart will be able or willing to tell you Produce a questionnaire that allows you
18、to reach your goal. You will probably not have a second chance to talk to people2Get the contactand organiseanappointment Target the appropriate contact who can give you information (Board members, head controller, head of operations) Call the person, convince him that you are a serious and competen
19、t counterpart and that he should invest his time talking with you3Carry out theinterviews Send him the questionnaire in advance so that he has the chance to see the scope of your analysis and be prepared to answer his questions Carry out the interview in person or over the phone4- 13 -FRA-0220-97097
20、-02-33Carrying out interviews in person increases the quality of the benchmarking resultsBlind QuestionnaireSend a questionnaire by fax or mail and wait for an answerQuestions must be easy to understand and with multiple choice answersPhone interviewCall and arrange an appoint-ment, send the questio
21、naire and call againGenerally multiple choice answers and few open questionsPersonal interviewCall and arrange an appoint-ment, send the questionnaire and visit themOpen questions are possibleTech-niqueLarge sample with low accuracyGood knowledge of the market is requiredFew specific targets partner
22、sInformation from middle managementVery few selected key targets partnersInformation from middle/senior managementFundamental to have a good market understandingIssuesPoor 020 % of the contacts reply Time frame: 1 month low accuracyModerate 50 % 70 % of the contacts accept to provide information Tim
23、e frame: 1 week medium accuracyAccurate 60 % 80 % of the contacts accept to provide information Time frame: 24 weeks high accuracyRes-ponseB.- 14 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33C.Using the right specialised techniques to create anapples to apples comparison- 15 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33First step: Evaluating empl
24、oyee/aircraft ratioA, B, C, D, represent real ground handling resultsC.MethodologyProductivity results (A/C per employee p.a.)No. of employees (Full time equivalent)Serviced aircraft (1000 movements p. a.)ABCD14355231,517332,935266400ABCD25918294165Consider ratio between number of employees and serv
25、iced aircrafts11- 16 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33Problem 1: The ground handling services offered differ per providers. c. = subcontractedC.Service offeredProductivity results11Baggage HandlingLoading/UnloadingPush BackSecurityMarshallingCleaningBussingPax HandlingABCDXXXXXs. c.XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXs. c.s. c.AB
26、CD25918294165?Yes but ,unlike the other I doPax Handling as wellas A/C Handling!Mr. C- 17 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33Isolating individual activities improves benchmarking resultsC.MethodologyProductivity results (A/C per employee p.a.)No. of employees (Full time equivalent)Serviced aircraft (1000 movement
27、s p. a.)Consider only operational employees in core activities: Baggage Handling Loading/Unloading Push Back22A B C D 14340831,516632,914766400ABCD350189224165- 18 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33Problem 2: Not all ground handlers service the same fleet; larger aircraft are more complicatedC.Serviced aircraftP
28、roductivity results(A/C per employee p. a.)Yes but ,unlike the others Iservice mainly largeaircraftMr. DABCD350189224165?ABCD37 %39 %11 %0 %13 %5 %4 %8 %10 %30 %20 %10 %30 %53 %18 %17 %11 %82 %1 %1 %Type 1 B747, A340Type 5 F50, DH 8Type 4 B737, MD8Type 3 A 320Type 2 B767, A310- 19 -FRA-0220-97097-02
29、-33In order to best assess workloads it is necessary to weight the workload per type of aircraft servicedRelative aircraft workload (Basis B-737)Source: Roland Berger & Partner ResearchC.Type 1B 747, A 340Type 2B 767, A 310Type 3A 320Type 4B 737, MD80Type 5F 50, DH-800,51,01,52,02,52,341,601,051,00,
30、50Relative weightB 737- 20 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33Productivity comparisons are best based on an assess-ment of workloadMethodologyProductivity results(workload per employee p. a.)No. of employees (Full time equivalent)Workload (1000 equivalent serviced B-737)Express workload in terms of equivalentserv
31、iced B-737 instead of number of aircraft33A B C D 12840832,716646,814782,4400ABCD314196319206C.- 21 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33Problem 3: Not all providers are subject to the same traffic profilesTraffic ProfilesProductivity results33Yes but ,my customerconcentrate their flightsin peaky banksMr. BA B C D3
32、14196319206?ABCDC.- 22 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33Peak width and height impacts required employee capacityAvailable employee capacity vs. actual need (example)Deadtime6:009:0012:0015:0018:0021:0000:00Peak-heightaveragePeak-widthtraffic profileC.- 23 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33Applying a peakiness factor neutral
33、ises the effect of differing traffic profiles1) PF is =1 for flat profileC.MethodologyProductivity results(weighted workload per employee p. a.)To assess for the peakiness of the traffic profile the workload should be multiplied by a peakiness factor1)44ABCD323256424249ABCD1,031,311,331,211,0- 24 -F
34、RA-0220-97097-02-33Further variables could be isolated that may impede direct comparisonsLevel of automation Number of ticketless passengers Number of mechanised processes Degree of IT exploitationServiceQuality Service level agreed with customers Split first/business/economy class passengersWorking
35、 Environment Climate Space Building design Environmental restrictionsScale effects Number of arrivals and transfer passengers Equipment sharing possibilities Number of hours that can be worked per dayC.Examples- 25 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33Concluding remarks: Comparing ground handling productivity prese
36、nts several pitfalls, but C.First step: Productivity(aircrafts per employee p. a.)Fourth step: Productivity(weighted workload per employee p. a.)ABCD25918294165ABCD323256424249- 26 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33 applying the appropriate mix of accurate benchmarks and modelling techniques works High similarit
37、y/Low complexity Use only benchmarks which are similar per customer and activityAdequate for: General market positioningExamples: B and D in the present studyLow similarity/High complexity Use any benchmark and apply modelling to account for differences in the operational set-upAdequate for: Compari
38、son with selected competitorsExamples: A and C in the present studyBenchmark similarityModelling complexityC.- 27 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33D.Interpreting benchmarking results correctlyto translate analysis into action- 28 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33The provider should determine his best approach to benchmarki
39、ng resultsBenchmarking Decision TreeD.yesStep 1Is the produc-tivity gap large/relevant?if no:No need for immediate actionyesStep 2Can the causeof the problembe identified?if no:Further investigationyesStep 3Can the causeof the problembe removed?if no:Assess impact on profit Determine alter-native ac
40、tion or exit strategyDevelopaction planand change- 29 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33To respond effectively, a provider must understand what he can influenceIllustrative exampleMultiply byFunction ofDivided byFXD.Personnelcosts/PAXNumber ofpassengersNumber offlights andtype of aircraftSeatload factorXCost of
41、allemployeesNumber ofemployeesNumberofpeaksNumberofPAXNumberofflightsAverage cost ofan employeeDegreeofautoma-tionRatio part/full timeem-ployeesGoingwage/salaryratesOut of scope? NO GO!In scope? ACTION!Xemplo-yeeproduc-tivtyFShiftstruc-tureF- 30 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33Summary: How to get the best benc
42、hmarking results and use them1.Identify the areas of weakness/potential to explore2.Determine the quality of answers sought and thus the best way to collect data3.Design questionnaires that are easy to understand and which incorporate understanding of possible complexities4.Isolate variables that ma
43、y distort benchmarking results and apply modelling as appropriate5.Assess the relevance of the results and maximise potential improvement by understanding relevant cost and quality drivers- 31 -FRA-0220-97097-02-33ARGENTINARoland Berger & Asociados S.A.International Management ConsultantsTte. Gral.
44、J.D. Peron 346 - Piso 51038 Buenos AiresPhone +54-1-3 42 14 98/9381/9270/9916Fax +54-1-3 45 57 58AUSTRIARoland Berger & Partner Ges.mbHInternational Management ConsultantsFreyung 3/2/10A-1010 ViennaPhone +43-1-53 60 20Fax +43-1-5 36 02 60BELGIUMRoland Berger & PartnerInternational Management Consult
45、ants100, Boulevard du SouverainB-1170 BrusselsPhone +32-2-6 79 01 70Fax +32-2-6 72 92 22BRAZILRoland Berger AssociadosConsultoria Internacional Ltda.Rua Alexandre Dumas, 2220-5 andar04717-004 So Paulo / S.P.Phone +55-11-5 24 83 66Fax +55-11-5 24 69 19CHINARoland Berger & Partner GmbHInternational Ma
46、nagement Consultants72 Xing Guo Road3F Business BuildingShanghai 200052 , P.R.C.Phone: +86-21-62 12 64 11Fax/Phone: +86-21-62 12 74 71Roland Berger & Partner GmbHInternational Management ConsultantsChina World Trade Center2630 China World TowerNo. 1 Jianguomenwai AvenueBeijing 100004, P.R.C.Phone +8
47、6-10-65 05 21 96Fax +86-10-65 05 54 84CZECH REPUBLICRoland Berger & Partner spol. s.r.o.International Management ConsultantsJungmannova 34CS-11121 Prague 1Phone +422-24 22 48 76Fax +422-24 22 48 77FINLAND (Representation)Kalevi KaivolaKasarmikatu 34 DFIN-00130 HelsinkiPhone +358-9-65 07 48Fax +358-9
48、-66 06 48FRANCERoland Berger & Partner GmbHInternational Management Consultants16, avenue George VF-75008 ParisPhone +33-1-53 67 03 20Fax +33-1-53 67 03 75GERMANYRoland Berger & Partner GmbHInternational Management ConsultantsArabellastr. 33D-81925 MunichPhone +49-89-92 23-0Fax +49-89-92 23-202Alt M
49、oabit 101aD-10559 BerlinPhone +49-30-3 99 27-50Fax +49-30-3 99 27-303Georg-Glock-Strae 3D-40474 DsseldorfPhone +49-211-43 89 01Fax +49-211-438 91 40Bockenheimer Landstrae 42D-60323 FrankfurtPhone +49-69-17 00 91-0Fax +49-69-17 00 91 20Stadthausbrcke 7D-20355 HamburgPhone +49-40-37 63 1-0Fax +49-40-3
50、7 63 11 02Lffelstrae 40D-70597 StuttgartPhone +49-711-76 73-0Fax +49-711-76 73-401GREAT BRITAINRoland Berger & Partner Ltd.International Management Consultants12 Stratford PlaceGB-London W1N 9AFPhone +44-171-4 91 95 92Fax +44-171-4 99 99 38HONG KONG (Representation)Roland Berger & Partner GmbHIntern