Competitor Benchmarking Methods

✈️ Airline Cost Structure: The Ultimate Professional Reference Every network decision is shaped by cost. This guide breaks it down clearly, precisely, and strategically. It’s your essential reference for evaluating route economics, understanding cost drivers, and aligning financial insight with network strategy. Keep this guide at hand for planning sessions, budget reviews, and strategic discussions. It’s your shortcut to clarity when analyzing route economics, cost allocation, and financial performance. The complete airline cost framework unfolds like this: 𝗗𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝗢𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗖𝗼𝘀𝘁𝘀 (𝗗𝗢𝗖): Costs directly tied to flight operations, split into: • 𝗙𝗶𝘅𝗲𝗱 𝗗𝗢𝗖: Costs that remain constant regardless of flight activity, aircraft ownership (lease or depreciation), maintenance infrastructure, crew salaries, and insurance. • 𝗩𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗗𝗢𝗖: Costs that scale with flight activity, driven by four key dimensions:   - 𝘾𝙮𝙘𝙡𝙚-𝙗𝙖𝙨𝙚𝙙: Costs per flight cycle, such as landing fees and outsourced handling charges   - 𝘿𝙞𝙨𝙩𝙖𝙣𝙘𝙚-𝙗𝙖𝙨𝙚𝙙: Costs that increase with flight length, such as fuel burn and en-route charges     - 𝙋𝙖𝙨𝙨𝙚𝙣𝙜𝙚𝙧-𝙗𝙖𝙨𝙚𝙙: Costs tied to passenger count, such as catering and GDS cost      - 𝙍𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙣𝙪𝙚-𝙗𝙖𝙨𝙚𝙙: Costs linked to ticket sales, such as credit card fees and commissions 𝗜𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝗢𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗖𝗼𝘀𝘁𝘀 (𝗜𝗢𝗖): Support functions that enable airline operations, such as sales, marketing, administration, and overhead. These are essential for sustaining commercial performance and organizational alignment. Understanding the hierarchy and drivers of cost is key to forecasting, route evaluation, and strategic decision-making. This guide helps decode that structure with clarity. This quick reference guide below connects every critical cost component with precise definitions, airline-standard classifications, and strategic relevance for network planning and financial modeling. 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁'𝘀 𝗜𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲: • Clear hierarchical structure of airline cost categories • Industry-standard definitions and classifications • Strategic insights for route evaluation and cost optimization 𝗟𝗶𝗸𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗽𝗼𝘀𝘁: 💾 Save this post for quick reference 🔄 Share with your network and spread the knowledge Which cost driver was the biggest surprise in your last network review?  Share your experience below 👇 and join the conversation with industry peers. #Air52Insights #Aviation #Airlines #AviationStrategy #NetworkPlanning

The most expensive mistake in business isn't financial - it's cultural. Here's the data... Last month, I watched a "successful" company implode. - Revenue was up 40% - Profits were soaring - Growth was explosive But something was rotting from within. The numbers told one story. The empty desks told another. Get Real-time Interview Assistance Here- https://bit.ly/4h3iGd7 Create Free Cover letter Here- https://bit.ly/406H1rK Get Jobs & Internship Updates Join Below:- . WhatsApp👉 https://lnkd.in/ghPTzV6m . Telegram👉 https://lnkd.in/ePxtYkFH . Here's what the research reveals about culture's true cost: 1. The Hidden Multiplier: • Companies with strong cultures see 72% higher employee engagement • Engaged teams are 21% more profitable • Positive workplace cultures boost productivity by 30% 2. The Expensive Exodus: • Poor culture doubles employee turnover • Each lost employee costs 1.5-2x their salary • High performers flee toxic cultures first But here's what fascinated me most: Louis Gerstner (Former IBM CEO) said it perfectly: "Culture isn't just one aspect of the game - it is the game" The science backs him up: 3 Critical Culture Metrics: • Employee engagement • Customer satisfaction • Cash flow When one falls, the others follow. I learned this lesson the hard way: Skills? Outstanding. Results? Exceptional. Culture? Toxic. Within 6 months: - 4 top performers quit - Client satisfaction plummeted - Innovation stopped Then everything changed. We rebuilt around 3 culture principles: 1. Trust Over Control (Give people autonomy to make decisions) 2. Growth Over Performance (Invest in development, not just results) 3. Purpose Over Profit (Connect work to meaningful impact) The results? • Employee turnover dropped 50% • Productivity jumped 40% • Innovation flourished The Oxford research is clear: A positive culture doesn't just feel better. It performs better. Your culture is your company's immune system. Strong? It fights off problems. Weak? Everything becomes a crisis. Is your culture multiplying your success? Or dividing your potential? The answer might be worth millions. What's one thing you're doing to build a stronger culture?

The Difference Between Business Model & Operating Model I’m often asked: What exactly sets a business model apart from an operating model - and how do the two work together? Let’s break it down. 1. What Is a Business Model?  A business model is essentially a company’s game plan for generating revenue. It outlines how the company creates, delivers, and captures value. Key components include:  - Customer Segments: Who is the business serving?  - Value Proposition: What need is being solved, and why does it matter?  - Revenue Streams: How does the business make money? 📌 Example: Netflix uses a subscription-based business model. Customers pay a monthly fee for unlimited streaming—a setup that relies on recurring revenue and delivering convenient, on-demand content. 2. What Is an Operating Model?  While the business model defines the what, the operating model defines the how. It’s the blueprint for how a company delivers on its value proposition day to day. Key components include:  - Processes: How work gets done  - People & Structure: Roles, responsibilities, and team organization  - Technology & Infrastructure: Systems and tools that power operations 📌 Example: Netflix’s operating model includes original content production, a sophisticated streaming platform supported by global data centers, and a customer service team to manage user inquiries. 3. How Are They Connected?  The business model sets the direction - it articulates what the company is trying to achieve.  The operating model enables execution - it’s how the company delivers on its promises. 📌 Example: Amazon’s business model is built on connecting buyers and sellers through an online marketplace, monetized through product sales, advertising, and Prime subscriptions. Its operating model supports this with an extensive logistics network, warehouse operations, and IT infrastructure that ensure fast and reliable service. 4. How Are They Different?  The business model is about what value is created and how it drives revenue.  The operating model is about how that value is delivered—through people, processes, and systems. ➡️ Both are essential.  ️➡️ A strong business model sets the vision.  ➡️ A well-designed operating model brings it to life.   What’s your experience aligning business and operating models?  I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments. ⬇️    #LeadingWithCulture #FutureOfWork #BusinessModels 

Sean Ellis invented the ICE prioritization framework, coined the term "growth hacking, was one of the earliest people to use freemium as a growth lever, and, most famously, developed the widely used Sean Ellis Test for product-market fit. Over the course of his career, Sean was head of growth at Dropbox and Eventbrite, helped Microsoft and Nubank refine their growth strategy, and is the author of one of the most popular growth books of all time, Hacking Growth, which has sold over 750,000 copies. In our conversation, Sean shares: 🔸 The proper use of the Sean Ellis Test for measuring PMF 🔸 How to increase your activation and retention rates 🔸 How to select your North Star metric 🔸 Case studies from growing Dropbox and other products 🔸 How growth strategy has changed over the past decade 🔸 How AI is already impacting growth efforts 🔸 Much more Listen now 👇 - YouTube: https://lnkd.in/g59FDqw2 - Spotify: https://lnkd.in/g7j2sHgd - Apple: https://lnkd.in/gH8CshEE Some key takeaways: 1. The “Sean Ellis Test” is a leading indicator of product-market fit. Run it by asking your users, “How would you feel if you could no longer use this product?” with options: “Very disappointed,” “Somewhat disappointed,” “Not disappointed,” or “Not applicable.” If 40% or more respond with “Very disappointed,” you have a strong indication of PMF. 2. Dig into the users who would be “very disappointed.” Use the insights to reposition your product, refine your messaging, and add/remove features, aiming to grow your “very disappointed” user group to 40% of all your users. 3. Sean recommends focusing on growth investments in this order: a. Activation/onboarding b. Engagement c. Referral d. Revenue model e. Acquisition 4. To increase customer activation, first identify the root cause of low activation rates. The simplest way to do this is by asking your users directly—through surveys, messages, or even notes via the customer service team. Often the issue is that users lack an understanding of your product’s functionality and benefits. To address this, focus on improving your positioning and messaging. 5. Choose a North Star metric that reflects the core value your product delivers to users. This metric should be actionable, not a ratio, and capable of scaling up over time. It should correlate with revenue growth but should not be revenue itself. Ensure that it provides a clear direction for the team and aligns with customer value. 6. The ICE framework, developed by Sean, stands for “impact, confidence, ease.” It streamlines the prioritization process by concentrating on these three essential criteria. This method helps you assess tasks or initiatives based on their potential impact, your confidence in their success, and their ease of implementation.

Excited to share that our BCG Henderson Institute + INSEAD + OECD - OCDE Report on #AI #Adoption is (finally) out! After 3 years of persistent work that began before the first ChatGPT release, I'm pleased to see this comprehensive study published. Working alongside Theodoros Evgeniou from INSEAD and Alistair Nolan from OECD - OCDE, we gathered insights from 1007 enterprises across G7 countries and Brazil. Despite the rapid pace of AI evolution, several findings remain remarkably relevant: - The persistent skills gap remains a critical barrier to implementation, with many companies still struggling to identify which AI capabilities they actually need - ROI uncertainty continues to challenge executive buy-in, requiring a "keep walking" approach to AI adoption - Cross-institutional collaborations (especially with universities and research centers) remain powerful accelerators for successful implementation - The striking variation in adoption rates across different countries highlights the importance of cultural and policy factors in technology diffusion However, I must acknowledge a crucial reality: These publications are operating in different time-spaces when it comes to AI research. The data collected between November 2022 and July 2023 – published now in 2025 – represents a technological era that feels distant in AI terms. In these 18+ months, we've witnessed fundamental shifts in how businesses approach and implement AI solutions. We urgently need new models for creating checks and balances in AI research and policy: - Real-time data collection systems that continuously update insights - Rolling publication schedules rather than monolithic reports - Hybrid approaches combining rigorous research with rapid assessment tools For those interested in AI adoption fundamentals and historical perspective, this report remains a valuable read with robust methodological foundations. At Seven2, I leverage the experience accumulated over many years and with exceptional fellows to ensure our portfolio companies adopt AI strategically, generating tangible financial returns. The objective is not to put AI everywhere, but "Where AI matters", in order to bring "money to the bank"! 🙏 Special thank you to Andrés Barreneche García, Timoleon Farmakis,John Fernald, and to my amazing former colleagues, Rodolphe Charme di Carlo, Clément Dumas, Lisa Krayer, PhD, Max Männig, Gigi Yang, David Zuluaga Martínez, for their persistence and resilience #AIAdoption #BusinessTransformation #DigitalStrategy #Innovation

Someone asked me what I think about marketing strategy — and it’s a tough question because good strategy isn’t just about frameworks or fancy decks. It’s about connection to real outcomes. Here’s how I think about building marketing strategies that work: 🔹 Start with the business goal. If you don’t understand what you're solving for, your strategy will miss the mark. What outcome are you driving toward? 🔹 Create strategies you can actually implement. Don’t build plans that require resources or skills you don’t have yet (unless you're only strategizing, not executing). Strategy should match reality — then stretch it. 🔹 Stay inspired. Consume a lot: newsletters, competitor analysis, random scrolls down Google rabbit holes. The more you absorb, the more creative you get. Inspiration expands your thinking. 🔹 Do your research. Unlike inspiration, research is focused. It’s about validating ideas, understanding the market, and getting data that backs your decisions. When you layer inspiration, research, and practical execution on top of a clear business goal — that’s when strategy moves from idea to impact. And when it’s not working? Iterate. Tweak. Try again. That’s the real playbook. #MarketingStrategy #GrowthMarketing #ContentStrategy #ExecutionMatters #StrategyAndTactics #LearningInPublic

There’s much to consider when reading The 2024 edition of “The EU Industrial Research & Development (R&D) Investment Scoreboard,” which continues its 21st year of monitoring and analyzing industrial R&D investment trends within the context of the EU. As highlighted in the recent ‘Draghi’ report, it is critical for the EU to significantly increase private R&D investments to address historical productivity gaps compared to major global competitors. The 2024 Scoreboard monitors the world’s top 2,000 R&D investors, responsible for over three-quarters of global business-sector R&D, based on financial information from the firms’ latest audited accounts. Chapter 2 analyzes key global trends and benchmarks the EU’s top R&D-investing companies against global competitors. Chapter 3 provides sector-specific insights, while Chapter 4 focuses on a subset of the EU’s top 800 R&D-investing firms. Chapter 5 examines R&D productivity from a long-term perspective and combines this data with information on Mergers & Acquisitions (M&A) to explore corporate innovation strategies. However, the report also contributes to another important discussion—namely, what Europe invests in when it comes to innovation, how these funds are allocated, and whether the innovation is future-oriented or incremental. It touches on innovation ecosystems, brain drain, and ultimately, the question of who is building the innovation environments of the future and versus those rooted in the past. European Commission: @Joint Research Centre, Elisabeth Nindl. Lorenzo Napolitano, Hugo Confraria, Francesco Rentocchini, Peter Fako, James Gavigan and Alexander Tuebke #Innovation #Innovationgab #EU #R&D #investments #Futures #Industial #Scoreboard

Top performers will spot the red flags fast. 11 signs of a horrible company culture: 1/ Fear Rules Daily → Mistakes equal punishment, not learning opportunities → Questions are discouraged with subtle hostility → Information is weaponized for power plays → Blame flows downward, credit evaporates → People self-censor to protect their careers 2/ Loyalty Means Silence → Disagreement equals disloyalty, even when right → "Team player" means blind agreement with leadership → Critical thinking gets labeled as "not aligned" → Yes-people get promoted, thinkers get sidelined → Truth-tellers disappear quietly from meetings 3/ Burnout Is Celebrated → Overtime is expected, not compensated → Balance means "weak commitment to success" → Vacation requests face passive-aggressive resistance → Breaks equal laziness in leadership's eyes → Health concerns are career limitations 4/ Leadership Hides → Decisions are mysteries until they hurt → Communication is one-way propaganda → Feedback gets ignored until talent leaves → Problems stay invisible until crisis hits → Credit flows upward, responsibility down 5/ Growth Is A Myth → Promotions lack clarity but never lack politics → Skills stay stagnant while expectations rise → Mentorship doesn't exist beyond lip service → Training budget vanishes first in every quarter → Potential dies slowly in endless meetings 6/ Politics Trump Results → Relationships beat performance metrics always → Favorites win regardless of impact → Merit means nothing against connections → Innovation threatens status quo defenders → Mediocrity gets rewarded with stability 7/ Toxicity Is Normal → Gossip drives decisions behind closed doors → Bullies go unchecked if they deliver numbers → HR protects power structures, not people → Good people leave first, quietly → Bad behavior has immunity if revenue follows 8/ Trust Dies Daily → Promises stay empty but expectations grow → Words contradict actions consistently → Transparency is fake corporate theater → Honesty gets punished with isolation → Cynicism spreads faster than good news → Documentation becomes self-defense 9/ Values Are Theater → Posters replace action on every wall → Ethics flex with quarterly pressure → Mission statements lie beautifully → Culture deck is fiction everyone quotes → Reality stays hidden from shareholders → Core values change with each CEO 10/ Talent Bleeds Out → Best people leave first, worst stay forever → Hiring stays desperate but standards drop → Standards keep dropping to fill seats → Quality people avoid you after interviews → Mediocrity becomes normal, then policy → Brain drain accelerates monthly 11/ Innovation Is Dead → Risk-taking gets crushed by committees → Ideas die in meetings about meetings → Change threatens power structures → Safe decisions win against smart ones → Future becomes past while competitors win → Disruption is a threat, not opportunity How many red flags do you see at your company? ♻️ Repost and follow Justin Bateh for more.

Most customer experience programmes don’t fail because they’re ineffective. They fail because the C-suite never bought in. The majority of CX reports are full of customer satisfaction, effort, NPS scores, and so on… But when leadership asks: → How much churn did we prevent? → How much pipeline did we accelerate? → How much revenue grew from existing accounts? Most CX teams can’t answer these questions. The strongest CX leaders I know don’t stop at “customers are happy.” They connect the dots to money and speak the language their C-suite speaks: ✓ “We prevented €2M in lost revenue by preventing customers from cancelling.” ✓ “We increased repeat purchases worth €700K by making the customer journey frictionless.” ✓ “We generated €1.5M in new revenue through referrals from loyal customers.” The reality is that the C-suite isn’t obsessed with surveys and scores, but they definitely want to know three things: ➤ What grew bigger ➤ What moved faster ➤ What nearly slipped away The metrics themselves aren’t useless (almost). But if you can’t translate them into business impact, your numbers will mean little when budgets tighten. Scores of any kind won’t keep CX programmes alive. Proving financial impact does. #cx #customerexperience

>> The biggest myth about leadership is that effective leaders rely on just one leadership style. There isn't a single style that fits all situations. The most successful leaders are adaptable. Every business and scenario requires a different approach. Here are 9 distinct leadership styles, along with their optimal use: 1. Commanding Leadership:   - How to Use: Make quick, decisive decisions and communicate them authoritatively. Expect immediate compliance.   - When Effective: Ideal for crises and new initiatives, but not suited for experienced, independent teams or when the leader lacks subject matter expertise. 2. Democratic Leadership:   - How to Use: Actively seek and integrate team input through meetings and discussions.   - When Effective: Effective for achieving consensus, but not ideal for urgent decisions or inexperienced teams. 3. Delegative Leadership:   - How to Use: Give team members autonomy and provide support only as needed.   - When Effective: Best for highly skilled, motivated teams, but not for those that require more structure. 4. Charismatic Leadership:   - How to Use: Share a compelling vision and motivate the team to embrace innovation.   - When Effective: Effective for driving change, but less suitable for stable organizations. 5. Servant Leadership:   - How to Use: Focus on team development and well-being by prioritizing their needs.   - When Effective: Great for building relationships, but not ideal for high-pressure situations or quick decision-making. 6. Pacesetting Leadership:   - How to Use: Set high-performance standards and lead by example.   - When Effective: Useful for achieving ambitious goals, but not for inexperienced or unmotivated teams. 7. Coaching Leadership:   - How to Use: Provide active mentoring and feedback to help team members enhance their skills.   - When Effective: Effective for skill development when time permits, but not for urgent decisions or unstructured teams. 8. Bureaucratic Leadership:   - How to Use: Rigorously enforce rules and procedures to maintain consistency.   - When Effective: Suitable for regulated industries, but not for flexible, innovative environments. 9. Strategic Leadership:   - How to Use: Formulate and clearly communicate long-term strategic goals.   - When Effective: Best for long-term planning, but not for immediate, tactical decisions. Always start by asking: What does the business need right now? Enhance your effectiveness—adapt your leadership style to fit the current needs. ---- 👉 Love my content? ☑ Follow me on LinkedIn: https://lnkd.in/gjUQk7HF 👉 Found this helpful? Share it! ♻️ Don't miss out! For exclusive AI and tech insights trusted by 430,000+ professionals at Microsoft, Google, Amazon, and more—join my free newsletter for cutting-edge strategies to keep you ahead in AI. 🔗 Subscribe now: https://lnkd.in/eFNvmcYa