No news that American is in serious trouble. Robert Crandall left the company in excellent shape for Carty. Not saying everything was roses, but he ran the company from top down and every employee knew who the CEO of American was, and who ran it. Mr. Crandall knew his responsibilities were to the share holders and customers. He was a demanding workaholic with a passion for profitability. Under his leadership, American was the first US carrier to ever post a billion dollar profit, not once but consecutively. The shinning company he left behind is in shambles and disarray. Didn't take long either. Assuming he had a free ticket to walk back through the old Amon Carter doors, could he fix the decrepit?
Robert Crandall
- Thread starter ULM148
- Start date
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,988
- 9,428
I'm a huge fan of Crandall, but no, I don't think so.
Management by directive and dictate seems to get slammed here from time to time. That was part of Bob's management style.
Being decisive is good, but Bob was also one to make decisions without worrying about including the unions in that process.
You can knock Arpey all day long on compensation issues (and I'll agree with you), but the books have never been more open to the unions than they have over the past 10 years. The fact that some won't believe what they're seeing is another issue altogether.
Given a chance, he'd probably also try to pull the plug on oneworld & go it alone. His personality is why UA wound up with LH in Star Alliance -- the Germans found him too abrasive. I can only imagine how well he'd go over in Asia, and that's where all the future growth is coming from.
Bob was the right guy to navigate the change from regulation to deregulation, and for managing explosive growth. A good man in a storm, but all storms are not created equal. What works in a Caribbean hurricane won't work in a polar cyclone on the Bering Sea.
Management by directive and dictate seems to get slammed here from time to time. That was part of Bob's management style.
Being decisive is good, but Bob was also one to make decisions without worrying about including the unions in that process.
You can knock Arpey all day long on compensation issues (and I'll agree with you), but the books have never been more open to the unions than they have over the past 10 years. The fact that some won't believe what they're seeing is another issue altogether.
Given a chance, he'd probably also try to pull the plug on oneworld & go it alone. His personality is why UA wound up with LH in Star Alliance -- the Germans found him too abrasive. I can only imagine how well he'd go over in Asia, and that's where all the future growth is coming from.
Bob was the right guy to navigate the change from regulation to deregulation, and for managing explosive growth. A good man in a storm, but all storms are not created equal. What works in a Caribbean hurricane won't work in a polar cyclone on the Bering Sea.
wings396
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 3,672
- 1,122
I would tend to think that he has been in the background, and consulted from time to time. What the airlines were during his time, and what they are today are worlds apart. In his day it was about growth and expansion, today it is about shrinking to survive. The situation at AA is no different that it is/was at other airlines. The market became flooded with cheap seats, and no CEO could have been prepared for 9/11.
Sadly though no airline is above the perfect storm created by US law aka, deregulation.
No not even walks-on-water Bob can save us now.
As long as Johnny Public can access the Internet and bid one dollar less for a airline ticket, the airlines are doomed as a long term
entity.
Is that an iceberg ahead ?
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,988
- 9,428
Yes in reference to Bob he gutted TWA with the purchase of TWA's London routes.
Bob should have purchased NWA from those Hotel guys when he had the chance. He blew it.
Now Delta is eating us alive..
The Great C unmasked.
NYer
Veteran
- Jun 4, 2010
- 4,169
- 923
He made those Billions on the backs of Labor--He was the one that introduced Part-Timers, A-B-C scales, and slew of other things between Pilots, Flight Attendants, Fleet and Mechanics. The person that did put our compensation on par with the rest of the industry was Carty. There was a collective sigh of relief when Crandall finally left.
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1997/04/28/225523/index.htm
How quickly things are forgotten.
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1997/04/28/225523/index.htm
How quickly things are forgotten.
Kind of reminds me of Winston Churchill, ready when called, thrown out when the trouble is over.
During the Titanic incident, didn't the Captain ignore the issue until it was to late?
Come on now, let's give credit where credit is due. Bob Crandall cannot bask in all of the glory when the union rolled over as well.
I got that for ya brother!
whatkindoffreshhell
Veteran
Remember when Crandall attempted to insititute that new fare pricing system? NW blew it up.
I am a Crandall fan but expecting him to return and lead AA to glory is not possible. The market has passed him by.
Didn't he almost go to jail for talking to that guy from Braniff ?
Pretty ballsy, and don't forget the " less olive " era.
This man was way ahead of his time.
Maybe he can walk on water after all.
- Thread Starter
- #13
Yes, relations with the Unions were stressed, and yes he left behind a trail of morale problems. Morale is a fixable problem. Health and viability of the company is another issue. The reason i raised the topic of Crandall was not to debate his moral destruction, rather to speak of his accomplishments with the growth and viability of AA. His ability to manage, guide and produce a viable airline for the shareholders. As a by-product, he also created a sustainable career for the employee's at AA. I did have a career under the Crandall regime, I now have a job. There is a difference.
Under Crandall the company was not micro managed. He did not take 1 department and reorganize it so there would be 3 VP's instead of one. There was no 12 layer cake of management under his watch. He knew that Bloating management would reduce profits, so it was not an option. He was shrewd, and callous and what ever else you'd like to throw in, but he was successful, effective, and most importantly a leader, without a doubt. He was like this with all work groups, and especially demanding on his executives, VP's and the board. Today's problem with AA is management and it's inability to be insightful. It can't seem to run the company but rather glide along. All the concessions in the world from any work group will not right American's wrongs. Effective leadership in my opinion ... will. Here's what Crandall's been up to... http://bobcrandallthinks.blogspot.com/
- Thread Starter
- #14
If you would like to chat with him and see what he has been up to his E-Mail is on his blog site. Or [email protected]. I think AA needs a leader, may not be Bob Crandall, but needs to be of that caliber. If it's not, were all just spinning our wheels.
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,988
- 9,428
My God, man... Crandall was not a micro-manager? Are you nucking futs?
I worked in management at HDQ when Crandall was still the boss. Micro-management back then was the norm, from Bob on down. Innovation wasn't exactly encouraged, and you never made a decision without having reams of paper to back it up.
Making a one word change in a boarding announcement or a slightly redesigned bagtag required a 20 slide presentation (no Powerpoint back then, had to send the slides out for camera work and preparation 3 days in advance), one binder per member of Planning Committee (printed on a special weight and gloss paper, using only 14 pt Arial with 1.25 spacing and all caps), and a four page summary memo (no email then) to describe what was going to happen. Preparing that as a L3, I had to approve everything with a L5, L7, and L8 before we took it to a L9. Then the L9 submitted it to the L10, and it was put on the agenda for review by the L11's and L12 (Bob).
No, I'm not kidding about any of that. Every analyst in our area had a two-page instructions document on standards for presentations going to the Sixth Floor.
And then there'd be weeks of back and forth deciding whether to use a 10pt font with 1.5 spacing or 11pt with 1.0 spacing on the bagtag...
And that was just a bagtag. Can you imagine what they went thru on Value Pricing? 35 people sequestered into a corner of HDQ for 90 days... Reviews with Bob and Mike on a weekly basis... Electronic ticketing was the same thing, but with only 20 of us locked into a windowless room with reviews every two weeks, arguing about the word "may" versus "must"...
By comparison, as a L4, after Bob left, I briefed Carty, Baker and/or O'Hare one-on-one on a dozen or so occasions. Same thing with Richardi as a L5. When we briefed Arpey, it was usually just me, a director or two, and Gerard. Stuff going to Executive Committee could be emailed the morning of the meeting.
HDQ was easily twice the size then that it is today, in part due to Sabre, but also due to the fact there was so much micro-management going on you had people who did nothing else but respond to Bob's "margin notes" on any memo or email he got. And he generated a lot of them... I kept a few from my area as reminders to my staff to show them what happens when you don't give a full and complete/honest answer...
Today there are "only" 9 layers of management. Two levels (L2 or L7) disappeared under Carty & Arpey, and in some organizations, it's even flatter.
In 1997, AMR had 56 VP's, compared to about 47 today. Taking out the 7 from Sabre, it's essentially the same today, but you also have to consider the number of departments and silos of responsibility are pretty much the same, and AA's rebuilt an IT department to take up about a third of what Sabre was doing.
I respect the ground Bob walks on, but unless you were at HDQ and saw the effects of management by intimidation in action, you really have no idea what you're talking about with regard to the differences in management styles.
HDQ may have swung a little too far in the other direction with Carty, but under Arpey, it's right in the middle. The one thing that hasn't changed is the ability to make a decision without some form of management by committee discussion and far too much analysis.
I worked in management at HDQ when Crandall was still the boss. Micro-management back then was the norm, from Bob on down. Innovation wasn't exactly encouraged, and you never made a decision without having reams of paper to back it up.
Making a one word change in a boarding announcement or a slightly redesigned bagtag required a 20 slide presentation (no Powerpoint back then, had to send the slides out for camera work and preparation 3 days in advance), one binder per member of Planning Committee (printed on a special weight and gloss paper, using only 14 pt Arial with 1.25 spacing and all caps), and a four page summary memo (no email then) to describe what was going to happen. Preparing that as a L3, I had to approve everything with a L5, L7, and L8 before we took it to a L9. Then the L9 submitted it to the L10, and it was put on the agenda for review by the L11's and L12 (Bob).
No, I'm not kidding about any of that. Every analyst in our area had a two-page instructions document on standards for presentations going to the Sixth Floor.
And then there'd be weeks of back and forth deciding whether to use a 10pt font with 1.5 spacing or 11pt with 1.0 spacing on the bagtag...
And that was just a bagtag. Can you imagine what they went thru on Value Pricing? 35 people sequestered into a corner of HDQ for 90 days... Reviews with Bob and Mike on a weekly basis... Electronic ticketing was the same thing, but with only 20 of us locked into a windowless room with reviews every two weeks, arguing about the word "may" versus "must"...
By comparison, as a L4, after Bob left, I briefed Carty, Baker and/or O'Hare one-on-one on a dozen or so occasions. Same thing with Richardi as a L5. When we briefed Arpey, it was usually just me, a director or two, and Gerard. Stuff going to Executive Committee could be emailed the morning of the meeting.
HDQ was easily twice the size then that it is today, in part due to Sabre, but also due to the fact there was so much micro-management going on you had people who did nothing else but respond to Bob's "margin notes" on any memo or email he got. And he generated a lot of them... I kept a few from my area as reminders to my staff to show them what happens when you don't give a full and complete/honest answer...
Today there are "only" 9 layers of management. Two levels (L2 or L7) disappeared under Carty & Arpey, and in some organizations, it's even flatter.
In 1997, AMR had 56 VP's, compared to about 47 today. Taking out the 7 from Sabre, it's essentially the same today, but you also have to consider the number of departments and silos of responsibility are pretty much the same, and AA's rebuilt an IT department to take up about a third of what Sabre was doing.
I respect the ground Bob walks on, but unless you were at HDQ and saw the effects of management by intimidation in action, you really have no idea what you're talking about with regard to the differences in management styles.
HDQ may have swung a little too far in the other direction with Carty, but under Arpey, it's right in the middle. The one thing that hasn't changed is the ability to make a decision without some form of management by committee discussion and far too much analysis.
Similar threads
