One of the keys to competitive advantage in today’s rapidly changing and globalized business environment is human capital. A good company must tap into the talents and gifts of its employees to ensure maximum productivity.
The Airline industry is one of the major industries in the world today and is no stranger to employee training. The internal rivalry amongst airlines is extremely high in Australia on both a domestic and international front. The airlines keep uptight competition in service, hospitality, and the quality of their products in order to win and keep customers. The research findings reveal that most clients work through brand association, personality, attitude, and image to shape a consumer-brand relationship (Ingham 1992).
Established in 1920, Qantas is one of the world’s largest airlines and the second oldest. It was founded by Hudson Fysh, Paul McGinness, and Fergus McMaster. Presently, Qantas is one of the leading brands in Australia and prides itself as a top long-distance carrier. Qantas is, therefore, a huge player in the international airline business and is known for its excellent customer service. It has also established a good name in terms of safety, reliability, and good customer service.
Referring to Figure 1, it is seen that Qantas followed a functional structure; this employs a functional department oriented scheme with relatively high levels of centralization. High levels of centralization tend to go naturally with the functional department-based system because individual units in the structures are so specialized that members of the unit may have a weak conceptualization of the overall organization mission. They, therefore, tend to identify with their department and cannot always be relied upon to make decisions that are in the best interest of the company as a whole.
In the UK, industries have undergone significant regulatory-driven structural change. As a result, many companies have undergone an organizational change. The result of this, however, suggests that many adopted sub-optimal structures (Chang & Chieng 2006).
The Qantas Group came up with a new executive structure to see the company through its transformation program. The changes focused on a lean top team with more responsibilities. It focused on answering the question of whether management makes a difference in transition (Peng 2001).
Under the structure, the management of the businesses owned by QANTAS has the liberty to develop independent business ventures but remain accountable in terms of returns on investment. The different wings of business are also encouraged to come up with plans that would encourage collaboration between the flying, non-flying, and corporate support businesses by Qantas.
Qantas has a college that is a Registered Training Organization. The college provides training to the Qantas Group, and employees are exposed to high-quality training in the airline industry. Organization learning, training quality, and innovativeness drives superior market value (Cho & Vladimir 2005) and is therefore vital in any organization. The college facilitates this learning and development.
The Qantas Group also has a comprehensive talent program that focuses on new graduate talent, emerging leaders, and senior talent management. The goal of these programs is to provide diverse opportunities for Qantas’ staff.
Tata Interactive Systems (TIS) developed a compliance-based e-learning system for flight attendants for Qantas. The system is based on a game where learners collect ‘frequent learner points’ which are redeemed for prizes. The game helps Qantas meet its compliance requirements, both locally and internationally.
Qantas has therefore invested heavily in its human resource, a move that has ensured that it stays ahead of the pack and continues to grow as a world-class airline company.
Chang, P & Chieng, M 2006, ‘Building consumer-brand relationship: A cross-cultural experiential view’, Psychology and Marketing, vol. 23,no. 11,pp. 927-959.
Cho, HJ & Vladimir, P 2005, ‘Relationship between innovativeness, quality, growth, profitability, and market value’, Strategic Management Journal, vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 555-575.
Ingham, H 1992,’Organizational structure and the internal economy of the firm: The UK industry’, Managerial and Decision Economics, vol. 13, no.6, pp. 463-474.
Peng, MW 2001,’Outside directors and firm performance during institutional transitions’,Strategic Management Journal, vol. 25, no.5, pp. 453-471.