Choosing an online booking tool can feel as daunting as
buying a new car. Do you go for the sporty number that will get you from A to B
quickly but only has two seats or do you go for the SUV that has plenty of
space for the luggage and extra passengers that you need on occasional
journeys? That is without even thinking about whether you want an electric or
gasoline-powered vehicle, the specification of the interiors and whether it
should be in white or sky blue.
The Three Cs: Content, Customer Experience, Control
With so much choice, many buyers and consultants recommend
focusing on a limited number of pillars. One successful approach focuses on the
three Cs—content, customer experience and control.
Content
Content—the air tickets, hotel rooms, car rentals and
more—is now pulled together from a wider range of sources than ever
before.
Tools offered by technology companies that are also global
distributions systems will naturally offer content from their parent company.
These days, that content is nearly always supplemented from other sources.
Frequently providers have agreements with companies that can consolidate air
content from low-cost carriers and other non-GDS airlines. This may also be
supplemented by direct connects with airline groups, which can be an API
created by the airline or content fed through using the NDC standards.
Content in categories other than air is often provided by
third parties—online travel agencies like Booking.com and Expedia for
accommodation for example.
All these different content sources also mean a user might
be offered numerous different rates for the same room in a chain property from
different sources but then not getting rates from the smaller, independent
properties.
Customer Experience
Content is more important than ever but it is not just about
having the most content and 2 million search results coming out. That’s too
much for users to handle.
Online consumer applications in spheres other than travel,
such as Amazon in e-commerce and Netflix in streaming, have spoiled us. We now
demand a slick experience whenever we are online and this includes when using
an OBT.
This is reflected in BTN’s research. User-friendliness was
the most important criterion when choosing an OBT, with almost two-thirds of
responding buyers saying it was one of the reasons they chose their particular
tool, more than any other consideration.
Yet there is clearly a long way to go on customer
experience—but that may also be partially by design.
“We are all very familiar with the consumer sites out there
and therefore people are looking to implement that style of system, both in
terms of look and feel as well as process flow. But there has to be a caveat,”
said independent consultant Chris Pouney. “There is a fundamental difference
between booking travel in a business and booking for leisure. If I go on a
dot-com to buy an economy ticket to Dubai, [the supplier site] is going to try
to upsell that. Within a business environment, we don’t want to upsell. We
often want to challenge people as to why they are going in the first place.”
Control
Having the ability to apply the company travel policy to
bookings made through the system is imperative.
Since their inception, OBTs have typically been fairly blunt
tools in the travel manager’s armory, allowing for broad implementation of
travel policy rules, like class of travel and flight duration and the promotion
of preferred suppliers. More nuanced control has been added as companies have
demanded more precision in their policies.
Festive Road research from as far back as 2002, showed
buyers clamoring about dynamic controls. Many wanted a tool with policy and
flow controlled by artificial intelligence, where trips were automatically
approved based on the ROI. They wanted to trust the technology, but there
remains a gap in the market even as many providers pursue more AI opportunities
and how far such tools can go before they become obstructive or—worse—wrong.
Plus, the problem with control is often that if users do not
like how they are being controlled, and they will step outside the system,
leading to leakage.
Is It Actually Six Cs? Contemplating Cost, Customization,
Complexity Management
While a consideration of the three Cs above can help
corporates make a choice about their online booking tools, they are not
everything. BTN’s buyer survey revealed a number of other Cs that should be
considered when choosing an OBT.
Cost
Cost has always been top-of-mind for corporate travel
managers and this is no different when it comes to online booking tools.
The costs of implementing an online booking tool come in
three major areas—initial set-up costs, ongoing costs related to the
technology—such as training—and the costs of making a booking through the
tool.
Different online booking tool providers offer different
financial models. Some tools, particularly the online travel management
platforms, have no set-up fees at all.
Providers are offering a growing number of ways to pay for
transactions. Flat fees have always been the most popular but providers will
also discuss subscription models with a number of bundled transactions or fees
that operate on a sliding scale depending on the volume of transactions in any
particular billing period.
What is certain is that the bigger the program, the more
leverage there is to negotiate with an online booking tool provider—whether
that is a technology company or a TMC.
“Cost saving is something we are moving away from,” says
Chris Pouney. “You can save [using an OBT], but it is not the be-all and
end-all. You can save money by making better choices, but success is about
efficiency and satisfaction. Efficiency might mean be cost savings, but it
could also be about booking times, turnaround times, handoff of data and
integration of systems.”
Customization
Customization is also perceived to be important when
choosing a tool. At its simplest, this could be making the OBT look and feel as
though it is part of the organization. In the early days of OBTs this might
have been as simple as putting the company logo on the front page but now might
involve integrating the tool directly into a company’s travel intranet.
It now also goes beyond these cosmetic factors and into
areas of policy and content—the ability to add content filtering by
sustainability rating if this is important to the corporate customer or the
inclusion of content that is particularly relevant, the small bed and breakfast
location next to the company headquarters, for example.
Complexity Management
Business travel post-covid has become a more complex
endeavor. And the requirements for OBTs themselves to deal with travel
complexities have trickled down. Some have taken on that challenge—often in the
form of more messaging and communication integration to educate users about
shifting policies, entrance documentation or health requirements and risks
associated with their travel.
Companies have said they are more focused on traveler
health, well-being and risk management. They may look to mandate the use of
their OBT to better understand where their travelers are and to ensure the
risks of travel have been properly communicated.
But managing risk that way also means the importance of
keeping users in the tool will be at an all-time high—and that consideration
may need to go back to the policy discussion, said one U.S-based corporate
travel consultant.
The online booking and policy strategy was strikingly
different as travel came back, she said, and buyers had a tendency to
“over-engineer these tools to the point where travelers can’t find what they
are looking for. … Nobody wants to absolutely require the preferred carrier. What
if the flight times are inconvenient for the traveler or if the carbon
emissions are more? The whole idea of balancing well-being, sustainability and
buying close, logical fares is huge. So for 50 percent of companies buying booking
tools now, the policy buttons of all these tools may actually be less
important.”
That said, what is less important now may become more
important later, so finding a booking tool with granular controls may still be
a priority for a purchase with long-term commitment.
Who Is Your OBT provider?
When you have decided on your priorities—whether that is
content, cost, control or some other combination—then the question is where to
find that tool.
OBTs are brought to market in many different ways. There are
technology companies, such as Amadeus and Sabre, who create their own tools,
namely Cytric and GetThere, which act as storefronts for their own GDS content.
These tools represented a way for companies that were primarily in the market
for travel distribution revenue to keep hold of their customers when internet
shopping became commonplace.
Today, corporates can choose whether they go direct to these
providers—if their volume is significant enough to warrant it. Or, more
commonly, companies choose to get access a booking tool through a reseller
agreement with their TMC. The former gives the corporate the most control but
adds complexity in relationship management.
Corporates can also take an OBT built by their TMC. AmTrav,
Corporate Travel Management and FCM, and others promote in-house-developed
tools, while others offer a smaller or larger selection of those from the
market. Some of those TMCs will have preferred relationships with certain
technology providers. Corporates must recognize that TMCs will usually work
better with their preferred OBT providers. Imposing another choice on them may
be counterproductive. Buyers should also understand there are commercial relationships
between TMCs and tool providers that may distort what is presented as the
“best” tool.
More recently, online travel management platforms that
combine the role of the TMC and the online booking tool have come to the
market. Egencia was the notable first in this but more recently the industry
has seen the emergence of disruptive alternatives such as Navan and Travelperk.
Using one of these platforms potentially offers one-stop-shop convenience since
there are no issues about the integration between the online booking tool and
the TMC’s own systems—they have been designed together from the ground up.
Some may view such companies as tech providers, first, and
not travel companies, but whether or not a company contracts with one really
depends on the company strategy.
There is an emerging option to consider, as well. The rise
in the availability of direct connects means a growing interest in developing
what some call BYO or “bring your own” model. Corporates could conceivably
design their own tool or platform using their own preferred partners or
in-house technology development resources and get content and other services,
such as risk management, from whoever is best placed in the market to provide
it and is happy to offer open access.
Newcomers like Spotnana—backed by travel and expense veteran
and Concur co-founder Steve Singh—are looking to develop demand and corner this
market, offering a modular microservices concept, both to corporates direct and
to TMCs. Some industry innovators have said this is the future of managed
travel. There’s a question, however, about how independent Spotnana will
be in serving other TMCs now that it is closely tied to Singh’s Direct Travel
TMC acquisition. The shoe is yet to drop on that development.
Regardless, the huge explosion in APIs and the capability to
connect different services—microservices—to make whatever integrated online
booking experience you want to create has captured the vision of some
experienced travel managers. The U.S.-based corporate travel consultant, who
plays in the enterprise space, told BTN “all my clients” are looking at these
options.
Theoretically, the choice isn’t limited to large companies.
Indeed, it might be simpler to construct for the midmarket, but it would
require a travel manager with true expertise in content, distribution and tech.
That’s a person SMEs may not have invested in yet.
Cutting Down Choice
A request for proposal—and increasingly a prior request for
information—will help corporates decide on a selection of providers, whether
they are tech companies, TMCs or online platforms.
“From a procurement perspective, you might run an RFI
exercise in advance of an RFP,” said Pouney. You wouldn’t want a full tender
with 10 OBTs—you want to get that number down to three or four.”
Corporates need to consider what elements are most important
to them and their strategy and to design the scoring for their bids around
those priorities. Corporates must also recognize that with technology changing
so quickly, what might be right today may look outdated tomorrow.