Issues with AC
 

Hey everyone,

I'm taking a marketing class this summer, and my prof gave me a brand assignment. I have to highlight THREE things that a brand needs to improve on (I chose Air Canada). So what are the top three things that Air Canada needs to work on? He recommended this forum to me, so I was hoping I could get some feedback- I've never flown Air Canada before!

Thank-you in advance,

Katie N.

Consistency, consistency, and consistency.

Katie - good luck in your course.

One of the ways to gain insights into customer needs is to ask them. You did that with your posting. Another is to observe their behavior and infer their needs. This forum provides a huge record - by reading through the history - of what is important to flyertalkers. I would suggest you form a hypothesis based on what you read and then - if you wish - summarize and ask for feedback on what you have found.

+1 Great idea, will make Katie actually earn the help of all of us. ;) :p

1. Learn from Industry leaders like SQ
2. Engage the customer(not isolate the customer)
3. Inculcate a Corporate Culture

wait wait wait.....isnt too much consistency too boring? (like the SQ forums)?

I only started flying AC about three years ago. Compared to EU and US airlines, they have great cabin interiors (esp inflight entertainment), good customer service and an excellent route network.

However, the perception among most Canadians is that Air Canada has bad service and is a poor airline. My experience (from flying 100k miles in the last 12 months on AC and having flown similar distances on a few other airlines) doesn't match that perception - and when I challenge people who have that perception, they generally can't back it up, and in fact admit AC is a pretty good airline.

My hypothesis is that people's experience/perception of AC is either outdated or so fixed as to be difficult to change (or perhaps both). AC needs to work to change the perception, and it's not going to be an easy task. Perception becomes reality all too quickly.

^^Very insightful and I agree 100%. Perhaps the problem is that those who fly infrequently blame everything on the airline. I have been SE for years and I love AC. They are good to me, good to pax as far as I can see but get delayed during de-icing and other winter issues. As a FF, I know these are out of their control, but pax that go for vacation once a year on March Break hate the line-ups, hate sitting in the Y cabin, hate waiting for de-icing, hate that it can take long to take-off if only 1 runway is operating but these are not airline issues but being our national airline, they take the brunt of it.

On another note, why would you choose to improve a company when you have never even tried their service? you should have picked Tim Hortons or something, would have made your life easier and would have made for a more realistic paper. Here you are going to take the advice of a couple of AC haters or AC lovers...you have virtually no way of doing any actual analysis unless you buy a 3 month unlimited flight pass and try to get on as many planes as possible to sample the service yourself.

What is too much consistency, there is no CONSISTENCY!!!

They are very consistent...what are you talking about? Pulling out one-off situations that were a slight deviation from your last flight? Are you one of those that thinks things are inconsistent because you board a flight and you hear:
1. Welcome Mr. djjaguar.
2. Welcome aboard Mr. djjaguar


what an awful airline if that happens...what am I to expect to next time? Maybe I'll get
3. Good afternoon, welcome aboard Mr. djjaguar

That would send me into a tizzy!!!

i thought we always joke about SQ being operated by robots :p

I would say:

1) engage the customer. They used to do this by having FT events where some AC execs would attend. I'm not sure why this stopped, but it made people who attended feel good about AC. Just listening to a customer can make them feel better about the brand, even if you don't do anything about it, it buys you some short term goodwill.

2) Employee attitude. All too often the response from an employee is I can't do anything about it. WS employees have a much different attitude and are a lot more positive. The entire culture at AC needs a change.

3) Transparency. With all inclusive pricing they are better now, but I still have an issue with them charging operating costs as part of a "reward". Most airlines do this, but I wish they would all just do away with fuel surcharges altogether.

I think they could improve their brand if they started offering tickets for 4 miles + taxes to HKG.

Ok, fine, 4 miles + taxes + YQ

1. they do a better job of this now with the AC listens panel. they are reaching out to more people than just FT'ers..
2. the attitude is great. I have not had anyone tell me they can't do anything abou it. if I am trying to re-route somewhere they try and try, sometimes they can, sometimes they can't. i don't expect them to fly a plane for me.
3. you are complaining about an industry issue, not an AC issue.

This is probably the biggest branding problem AC has, and perhaps the most difficult element of it is that it is perpetuated by the media. If there is snowstorm shutting down airports, inevitably the media report how AC has inconvenienced customers and often somehow imply that it is only AC leaving people stranded somewhere. How do you fix that? Figure that out and AC will probably hire you!

An industry wide problem is how the majority of (North American) airline customers always choose the cheapest fare causing the inevitable race to the bottom between airlines to be the cheapest by cutting service to a bare-bones minimum. And then customers get upset at the lack of service they get when paying $150 for a 5h flight across the continent. This behavior not only causes all airlines to have a branding issue but also drives them to the brink of bankruptcy (obviously there are other reasons for that too).


It would be very interesting to read your final report. If you do publish it on the web once it is completed, it would be great if you posted a link here.

How interesting would this report be? if he is Canadian and has never flown AC, has he ever flown? one flight on werstjet doesn't mean he can write a report...I bet this report is as useful as a condomn machine in a monastery.

Three words: Care; Respect; Attitude.

When compared to most other NA airlines AC is pretty good most of the time, i.e. when things are going as planned. Some of us would say that it's not the best, it's simply the least bad. The few % of the time when they're not good is when things go sideways for whatever reason (weather, mechanical, volcanos, etc). That's when most pax believe (rightly or wrongly) that they don't care, have no respect for the customers and have a bad attitude. You could write a book on why this happens, whether or not it's justified, what the root cases are, etc.

Many Canadians joke the the AC motto is, "We're not happy until you're not happy". To many more, the AC reputation really is lower than a snake's belly. Unfortunately, once a brand gets to this state it is impossible to fix without caring, respecting and having a customer-first attitude. Even then, as in my case, once things start to look like they're getting better, it only takes one or two incidents to reset at the bottom of the ladder and you have to start all over again.

If there is one thing they can do to improve? Look after your customers when things start to go wrong. That's when they need you most.

Public perception
Aeroplan relationship
Cleanup fare structure (last minute rip offs versus giveaways, US origin fares, etc)

The AC brand has been severely damaged by both the company and its employees. If Canadians have a negative perception now, it is because AC and its employees squandered the goodwill that was built up over the years. The sight of the bold maple leaf on an AC jet used to reassure me, now it doesn't. Canadian travelers want to take pride in their airline and both AC management and its personnel have to change their hostile negative attitudes and understand that they are a historic institution. At the risk of incurring the wrath of some people on this board, AC has a US airline mentality. What's needed is a reflection of Canadian values. Call it a naive view, but the airline went downhill when it embraced US airline strategies and US labour practices. Quatar, Emirates. Cathay and Singapore employ a varied group of international executives and the US approach to running an airline doesn't dominate. I'm not bashing the USA, but surely it must have dawned on someone that the US derived strategies are not working.

How far do you have to go back to find it was still "undamaged?"

Not sure I can remember.

It's not easy to cater at the same time to people making it a national sport to find rock bottom fares, but at the same time expecting a reasonable level of service.

Perhaps the real challenge is finding a way out of that infernal cycle?

I.e., getting people to understand, you pay rock bottom, do you seriously expect service?

Or, you want service, presumably you expect to pay for it.

Key issue, these are different business models, and maybe there is a choice to be made? AC (and many other airlines) is trying to have it both ways. Can that work?

Looks like AC is trying with their new T+ fare structures.

The websites, both AC and AP.

On the AC website, it often shows fares that are impossible to book and then comes up with some error message asking you to call the call center. The multi-city tool is useless for booking T+ fares unless by coincidence there are no T fares available. It is very rare that I can ever book my ticket on the website, I always end up having to call.

The AP website is down for maintenance way too often. I have never come across any other website that requires as much maintenance as the AP website. Due to the fact that I'm living in Asia, I probably notice this more because it's always down in the middle of the day. It's also impossible to book some valid itineraries online, especially multi-city. After selecting flight 1, the options for flight 2 are greyed out with a message saying that those flights cannot be combined with flight 1. Then you have to pay a $30 fee to book it by telephone because their website doesn't work.

AC and AP need make some effort to upgrade their websites to eliminate these glitches and minimize maintenance time.

Robots are programmed to carry out tasks with consistency and also to adhere to company policy. ;)

Yes Sir/Maam, Right Away Sir/Maam!!!

and robot do not call in sick.

OP, here maybe another idea for you....

The focus of AP (and perhaps AC as well) is to reduce cost. What AP did is to drive members away with the "enchantments" hence reduce cost. What AC does is similar, introduce Tango fare and remove benefits, to reduce FA work load in flight to keep them happier.

:rolleyes:

Agreed that's what AC is trying to do. Won't work I suspect.

Not sure what you mean with "new T+ fare structure." I am nor aware of any changes in Tango Plus?

What world are you living in. I guess we travel on different airlines.

AC listens is a great idea, if they listen. We met with them on the do last year in Montreal. One on one they were fantastic, the whole evening was impressive. A couple of months later came the enhancements.


The attitude of most employees is one of the company is screwing us. What they do to help you is because they care on a personal level. Talk to one off the record, see how they are treated. There is no want to win like at WS. For many its just a job. If they upgrade you to J in an irop, they are held accountable. Lots of time wasting explanations required. Front line employees are afraid of an autocratic, far to big bureaucracy, that saps the life out of the company. It's an attitude that does not reward employees thinking out of the box or taking initiative. The shares are below 1.50 for a reason.

If it was not for the feds stacking the deck, and only based on their business model and executive talent, the company would have been bought out or have been liquidated long ago.

Don't piss off....
 

....your most consistent customers with downgrades in benefits and then having the added gall of calling them enhancements.

Don't fill the front of the plane with employees in uniform when the back of the plane is filled with folks with SE/E tags on their carry on.

Don't compare your service levels to the lowest common denominator (US legacy airlines) compare them to Airlines that actually provide decent levels of service.

Thats the best part of it all. They do not get tantrums!!

That was the whole purpose of the meeting, get you all drunk on free flowing beer and wine and then stab everyone in the back with enhancements.

Agreed 100% with the above. Intra-Europe bookings are still not allowed on the website which is royal P-I-A and the false availability issue is annoying to members as well as the call centre agents at AP. That has to be addressed asap.

The major AC issue for me right now is that I'm very concerned about the appearance of the aircraft of late. The Dash's are dirty and rundown, some of the E90 interiors are shabby and parts are actually missing in the washrooms, the 767s/330s/320s/319s all have non-functioning washrooms on a semi-regular basis as well as duct tape and masking tape holding things together in the cabin and the washrooms.

I know that flying safe is the key but with these aircraft staying in the fleets for years more, cabin maintenance needs to be addressed regularly.

Has anyone else noticed this of late?

T+ nearly doubled from a year ago and has been further enhanced with a doubling and tripling of change fees.

Tend to agree with zorn. Consistence is the key for busy people who plan their travel well ahead. I was flying with AC for almost 15 years, always been a big fan and supporter... until they started introducing changes without announcing or announcing on a short term when I couldn't adjust my travel plans to satisfy their changing requirements. Then I learned how little they cared about my inconvenience and dissatisfaction. This is what I'd call being inconsistent and what caused my loyalty to move away from AC. Hope they will improve in the future.

As a frequent flyer (not as frequent as many of you guys!) my personal perception of AC is that the consistency is degradation of FF benefits and a general disregard for FF as customers that one might assume are somewhat important to the company.

It's also hard to separate the perception of AC and the perception of AE. Though I intellectually understand they are legally separate entities, the reality is that much of my brand perception of one is greatly influenced by the other. It's really hard I think, to have a strong airline without also having a strong FF program.

As an actual airline though. objectively I'll have to say that AC is adequate. It gets me from A to B, mostly on time, mostly in airplanes that have a pleasing interior with decent creature comforts such as individual IFE and food that tastes OK. Compared to other airlines in North America and perhaps even some in Europe, AC can hold its own. Compared to Middle Eastern airlines auch as Qatar, Etihad etc and Asian airlines it's a different story. But it's also a different game in those geographies so I can overlook certain AC deficiencies.

For my brand perception of AC to increase, I would want to see a better, more caring attitude towards FF. Part of this is enabling front-line staff to use their own discretion in dealing with the one-off issues that come with frequent flying. I would also want to see a stabilization of benefits and get a sense that they won't be further enhanced. Thirdly I would like to see many Aeroplan issues fixed. For example, the $30 booking fee should go away particularly since so many routes can't be booked online. I would also like to see a stop to the scam charges, or at least an acknowledgement of what they truly are instead of the subterfuge that AC / AE actively engage in. This gets back to a more caring attitude towards FF and pax in general - not all of us are stupid.

So did latitude. When Z is now often cheaper than latitude. These are price changes, not changes in the fare structure.

My own opinion tends to reflect what others have said already, but, if I may be permitted to put it in my own words:

I have had relatively decent in-flight experiences with AC; acceptable to good in Y, good to excellent in J. Interactions with AC ground staff at the airport(even excepting the incident linked to in my signature) have been less satisfactory.

The three major problems as I see them:

1) Mis-alignment of incentives between the staff and management. We may make snide remarks about WJ, but the employees there seem to have a much clearer interest in the promoting the company and ensuring its fiscal health.

2) Mis-alignment of incentives between AC and AE. As the two companies are now legally separate, their interests are starting to diverge, to the detriment of the overall customer experience.

3) Uncertainty about market positioning. Who does AC see its peers as? The in-flight experience may be somewhat better than the US legacy carriers (although, IMO, not enough to justify the price premium and loyalty progam differences (Tango in particular)). It does not, however, compare to the Asian or Gulf carriers such as SQ, NH, OZ, EK, EY, etc. (even in Y), so its boasts about "Best International Airline in North America" ring a bit hollow to those of us who have flown these airlines.

As to how AC can improve: the old cliché "Under-promise and over-deliver" is probably a good place to start.

TB-ES

There will be considerable bias on this forum as it is predominantly those with top tier status. As much as there are (legitimate) complaints about AC, the customer experience for TT members is substantially better than that of the non-status PAX.

So it should, shouldn't it?

and fare equivalent to AC Z is frequently less expensive at other airlines than AC on the same route.

AC is insulting its passengers by setting fare at significantly higher than its competitors on the same route.

Discount business class: YYZ-HKG (All-in)
CX $6,300
UA $6,200
LX $6,200
TK $5,900
BR $4,000

AC? $7,150!

AC - give me a good reason why I should fly you?

Because it's nonstop? (OK, so perhaps so is CX? But they are the foreign guy. Won't get MM status on CX if you live in canada.)