Silver Fox

Our CEO likes us to practice what she preaches. Which is one reason she is up to 11 quarters of declining revenue.

pittpanther

So if I was a manager at a company with controls in place, I would have asked you 3 questions:
1. Why can't this be handled by a conference call?
2. Why can't you go a day or two later (as many corporate "emergencies" seem to disappear in a couple of days)?
3. Is the client paying for your travel? If so, have a nice trip!

pittpanther

Ginny, is that you?

pilotalan

Is it cruel and unusual?
No. Every plane crossing the Atlantic and Pacific has 75% of its passengers in coach, and they all seem to arrive alive.

Question:
If you were flying to Europe on vacation (and had no status), and you were paying with your own money, would you pay $1100 for a coach ticket or $4000 for a first/business ticket?

Silver Fox

I couldn't possibly comment.

Tchiowa

Having spent a couple of decades travelling for business, I can say that my experience is that 99 times out of 100, you get 100 times as much done in person that you do in a conference call.

2 experiences I've had similar to the post you responded to:

I was in Kuwait and got a call asking me to be in Perth "immediately". Got there within 24 hours. No, the flight wasn't cheap.

I was in Thailand on my way home from Kazakhstan and got a call telling me to take a right and head to Perth the same day. Not cheap either.

Sometimes the numbers make sense.

Artpen100

The discussion reminds me that different companies have different needs. Mine is mainly consulting, most of the employees who travel are higher end of salary scale, and client relationships are important. We are often pushing people to meet clients more in person, not less. Generally, travel pays off with more projects sold. I think that leads to the leniency in allowing people to make their own arrangements, but the economy only policy keeps it from getting out of hand. On the other hand, I could definitely see other businesses not get much benefit in return for travel in many cases, and put in place policies to discourage it in general.

drvannostren

Hey man, imo if the CEO is willing to do it, then everyone else should. I like this guy .

pittpanther

I may dispute the "100 times" figure, but absolutely being in person is always better than being on the phone. You're focused, you have no distractions, you are concentrating on nothing but that immediate client. But can a conference call often be "good enough?" Maybe if you hadn't taken that entire day to focus on that one client, a half dozen of your other clients may have been better served? Who knows.

pittpanther

I have no idea what you do for these clients. But looking back as objectively as possible, could you have accomplished what you did in person (or most of what you did in person), on the phone?

darthbimmer

My experience is similar. I wouldn't say it's 100x the value, though; more like 5-10x depending on the situation. I can offer numerous anecdotes to support this. Though that doesn't always convince a skeptical boss who's never traveled.

Tchiowa

OK, OK, OK. 95 times.

In my case, I rarely have more than 1 client at a time. Occasionally 2 or 3, but that's rare.

No. And I say that without hesitation. The personal interaction you get with people simply can't be duplicated on the phone or even a web conference. Frankly half the problems I solve get solved with meetings out in the hall way during breaks. I identify the true "problem solvers" in the group, isolate them and sort out issues. That strategy can often fix things in 5 minutes that you won't solve in 5 days of meetings or 5 weeks of phone calls.

Wow, you guys are negotiating me way down!! OK. 7X.

ysolde

When I worked, the policy was that travel was in F only, in part because we were expected to be either working or sleeping while in flight; in part because we were expected to go straight from the airport to work (document reviews, depositions, client prep, etc.).

Nowadays, I accompany my husband on work and leisure trips. We pay for our own travel, and travel in international J, domestic F (unless it is a very, very short hop). For myself, for health reasons, I cannot travel in less than J. Once the spousal unit "discovered" J, and how much better he felt when he arrived at our destination, having slept in a flat bed and eaten a decent meal, he decided it was worth it for him, too. We are, let's face it, middle-aged. Travel takes a bit of a toll, so the cost of a J ticket, and being able to attend meetings and dinners on arrival is simply something we have to consider at our age.

mandolino

He/she possibly does specialist oilfield services, like myself.

If an offshore operation is on $1.5m/day spread cost , as many were, (at least until recently! :-( ) then it's entirely possible that the presence of one technical specialist can save hundreds of thousands just by saving some hours or taking charge in some situation where everything has come to a stop.

Or by getting to a preplanned job that has suddenly come forward and would be waiting if they didn't show up in time.

On that occasion, get them on a plane and don't worry about the cost - it will still be less than what they're losing if he/she doesn't get there in time.

But if you're talking about multiple people making multiple trips for more routine reasons, then the cost/value equation is totally different again.

mike_la_jolla

I'd argue it is higher ...