Christine Ourmières
Air France KLM in July 2009 appointed Christine Ourmières to the post of U.S. vice president and general manager. At that time, joint venture partners Air France, KLM and Delta(including subsidiary Northwest) had just begun integrating corporate sales and account management. Ourmières discussed the JV's progress with The Transnationalhere last week during the National Business Travel Association annual convention.
Can you explain the structure of the JV in the United States, in terms of selling to accounts?
The story started in 2009 when we signed the JV with Delta, Northwest, Air France and KLM. From a U.S. perspective, it was decided to show as fast as possible one face to the customer. We knew from our past experience [with pre-existing JV partners Northwest and KLM] that it is a key success factor. We started with a transition year to April 2010. During that year, we had the concept of an account manager in charge and a supporting account manager working together. Also, the offer [to corporate accounts] was a little more complex, with Delta-Northwest and Air France-KLM. [Before the mergers] Northwest was used to selling KLM, but to add Air France and Delta we had to find a way to meld everyone with the same knowledge. During this transition, we signed joint contracts with our corporate customers and travel agency customers. These are not contracts where you have an umbrella and addendums, but really one contract. Now, since 1 April 2010, we have one team and no longer use the concept of one account manager coordinating and one supporting. Now there is one account manager [for each account] and one organization responsible for all the products of the joint venture. And now that we have Alitalia arriving, it will be included in all our contracts--corporate and travel agency.
How did the combination of the sales and account management teams affect the overall number of sales personnel?
In the United States, KLM already was represented by Northwest, so they did not have any sales resources in the United States anyway. In the new Delta-led organization for the United States, Air France also reduced the number of people on contract compared to the situation where Air France was only selling Air France products. We have been through a selection process between December 2009 to the start of the new organization in April 2010. We have Air France-contracted people that have been selected to be included in the new Delta-led sales organization. All the sales people in the JV sales organization are selling all products--transatlantic, transpacific, transcontinental and Latin America. It is the same principle for everybody, but in addition we have product directors on the team because we have to admit that the offer the sale team sells to corporates is more complex than for any previous sales team of the past. They have to sell all the products, and it is difficult for them to know all the details. So we invented the concept of a "360-degree sales team" but with some product directors [from each specific airline] who are experts helping the top management of the sales organization move forward. Doing this change was not easy, but we had to do it to be efficient and competitive in the market.
When combining corporate contracts, was the focus still on market share for discount or are there other things you can do to enrich the relationship?
The principles of contracting are the same. What is more complex is the way you track performance. We have been lucky because Delta has some great tools. There is one tool for travel agencies and one for corporations, and the corporate tool is linked to Prism. The mistake would have been to use more than one--a tool to measure the transatlantic and a tool to measure the rest. Then you would have the huge problem of not focusing on the business anymore, but focusing on comparing figures. So the contracting process in the United States for the JV uses Delta tools only, and in Europe we are using Air France-KLM tools. If from the beginning you don't agree on one set of tools for one region and for one contract, you get into trouble.
We understand that SkyTeam at times may require a corporate account to use all member carriersif they want an alliance deal. Can you comment on whether or not buyers have the flexibility to select which SkyTeam airlines they want to include and which to exclude?
There are many steps in consolidations. First you have code shares, then alliances, then joint ventures and then full merger. It is true that after a merger--Delta-Northwest and Air France-KLM--when we sign deals you don't offer just the products of one or the other without linking the two. We are stronger together. In the JV deals, it is exactly the same. But you listen to your customers. Our teams are looking to give the best solutions to global corporations, and compromise when we need to. Competition is difficult, and we are not in a world where you can be black and white. If a customer is looking for a SkyTeam deal, it is because he is interested in the network of the alliance. Or he will have a deal with the JV or a deal with just Air France. You need to have that dialogue. It is the job of the sales team to push the offer and the best solution. If you are interested, we will talk about it. If you are not, we will try to find other solutions.
Is there a desire or need to align ancillary sales policies among JV partners, particularly bag fees?
We did [bag fees] already. That was an interesting one. It was a very long process; there are always cultural differences between French, Dutch and Americans. The question is, what should be different and what should be aligned? Bag fees should be aligned. But we do have differences today in the ancillaries--even between Air France and KLM. From time to time, it is important to test new concepts. (For example, [Air France] has an option online called "time to think." You book a ticket online, but if you want the time to think about it, you pay a fee to keep the option for a period of time.) It is not certain that in the future we'll all be the same. We have to define what should be consistent based on what is important to the customer.