Originally Posted by
deniah
respectfully, those sound like nonsense variables to justify a priori conclusions. (and tons of people on FT will use all sorts of justification for their traveling in 1 class or the other.) many major companies and industries have vastly different policies.
nobody making or approving travel policies does it based on a numerical basis like that. premium classes are first and foremost a matter of comfort (and much less so "productivity"), so whether one class fly in premium mostly has to do with pay and prestige. those who highly paid roles are in P&L with sufficient margins for such expenses, and "deserve" the extra comfort. mostly.
If we were to take your statement at face value, we'd never challenge anything; we'd accept whatever was received practice.
Personally I think differently. And considering many of the people flying for business are consultants or sales staff, who at the end of their flight will have to (usually quantifiably) show the benefit of their product, and who in the former case will likely use very similar tools (name a consultant who doesn't love a good algorithm), I often think what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
The unexamined life is not worth living, and going beyond facile statements such as "pay and prestige" (which is already incorporated into the equation) to actually pull the situation apart strikes me as a much more useful approach.
I'm willing to bet that if companies used this sort of approach they'd be able to strip a fair bit of cost out.