Op-Ed: Business Travel Associations Need Rationalization, Rather Than Duplication

It is time for a fresh look at the roles of the National Business Travel Association and the Association of Corporate Travel Executives. Every other industry is seeking rationalization, so why not trade associations in travel?

In my view, the new economy suggests no one can afford two competing organizations. This is not a question of weighing the benefits of a free market for education and networking, but rather the demonstrable costs and inefficiencies that harm the travel industry.

While the goals are identical, industry advocacy and education, the overlaps between NBTA and ACTE in educational topics and sessions and required supporting resources are dramatic and unaffordable. To a degree the sessions are "old wine in old bottles."

Recurrence of topics is apparent in looking at conference brochures and forums over the past several years. Topics include online booking, meetings, policy, best practices, global or regional consolidations, etc. That's not to say there is no value in reexamining these topics, only that two or more conferences are not warranted each year.

Companies buying and managing travel increasingly are limiting gratis time to only one participation, which pressures the memberships and attendance at conferences.

Suppliers cannot really afford dual support. There remains an ironic "lemming" mentality. Each feels the customer risk is too high to pull back or remove participation. Parties are fun and great for networking, but are they cost-justified? What an irony if suppliers are forced to Chapter 11 or 7 while partying with customers. Even GM stopped that.

Each organization tries, with some success, to enhance attendance by paying large if not excessive fees to big-name speakers. The topics are marginally related to business travel. The speakers often use relatively worn-out talks they give repeatedly to different audiences, thus multiplying their speaking profits by adjusting slightly their presentations.

I confess to enjoying some of these talks, but I have seen the same ideas if not words used on TV around the same time of the high-cost speech at the two travel conferences. What real value do Bill Clinton, John Major or Jesse Ventura add to travel management?

There is a difficult to understand focus on differing membership. Each organization encourages suppliers to participate, especially for financial support, but "allied" versus "direct" membership seems at odds with the procurement philosophy of true "partnering."

Allowing all to have the exact same voice and vote may be inappropriate but this is a weak justification for operating competitively with large and costly administrative staffs headquartered a few blocks from each other. (At last count, NBTA numbered approximately 37 full-time employees.) A single organization could work out a way to support participation by all. Some voting might be split between suppliers and buyers or other forms of recognizing legitimate differences.

ACTE and the Professional Convention Management Association are building an alliance. This recent precedent supports a bolder exploration of a single travel association. Politics or a "them versus us" mentality resulting from international cultural differences should not obstruct serious exploration of a merger, joint venture or other forms of cooperative collaboration. Fortunately, antitrust laws are inapplicable and there are no foreign participation restraints like those faced by airlines.

Each association could remain temporarily legally separate but combine meetings and educational focus through the establishment of a joint venture that would rationalize places, times and dates for meetings and uniform topics and sessions. A first step should be joint global meetings so no one has to plan and finance separate travel and use of time-starved dates for essentially the same purposes.

Today, each organization is successful although financial strains are evident, especially for ACTE. Each serves a vital and vocal constituency. Like healthcare, the issues of their future are complex and controversial. All trade groups are struggling for volunteers and continued financing in the "new economy," NBTA and ACTE face no less of a challenge. They are courageous and proactive when companies and suppliers are laying off thousands. Travel has never been more vulnerable. Buyers see the risk of a precipitous decline of services, while costs remain high compared to volume. Suppliers are squeezing every penny for survival and that includes TMCs as intermediaries.

It is time to reactivate serious discussions of best practices for industry business travel associations. Can the travel industry afford two giants that look a lot alike and compete for members and overlapping financial support during crisis?

I volunteer to help.