Author: Eugene Hoeven

WHAT, now. HOW, then.

Read Time: 3 minutes

What to do, not how to do is the central question for leaders

In these rapidly changing times brought on by digitalization, deciding “what to do” is ever more important than determining “how to do” it. And, deciding “what not to do” is perhaps most imporant of all.

In my conversations with executives, there is always the eagerness to learn how I can help them to get more clients, to grow the business, to make it more efficient, innovative and agile,…. to improve business performance.

These are all perfectly reasonable business outcomes. We all want greater success, and quickly. But then the discussion very quickly jumps to “how will you do that” for us? It is the wrong question and expectation.

You see, the starting point must always be to first determine the objectives that will help you achieve the business outcomes you want. It is first and foremost about getting focused on those few, but very important things what will make the biggest difference for your business – “the what”. How this will be achieved is secondary and always contingent upon objectives.

As the saying goes, “if you don’t know where you are going, any road will get you there,” and this is nowhere. “What to do” is the central question to productivity and effectiveness – to getting to where you need to go.

The journey to your distination requires you to make judgements and assumptions about the market and your firm. It is like assessing the terrain and state of your car before you venture out on your journey.

In other words, questions like: What does the market – and specifically, the consumer – really want and value?

Importantly, this should to some extent be anticipative – oftentimes the customer does not really know what he wants, at least not yet. This may not always be self-evident, and requires adopting a mindset of inquiry and design-thinking in an iterative approach.

It was not until Steve Jobs discovered and articulated what the consumer valued most was simplicity and ease-of-use of a PC that things really turned around for Apple, thereby defining an entirely new market.

From this initial point of inquiry comes a second: What should be the firm’s role in this new reality? Why does it exist? In other words, what should be its mission?

Mission statements can and do change over time in order to stay relevant and impactful. A clear sense of mission is essential for employees to believe in their company, its purpose and the value it is meant to create for the benefit of society.

Tesla’s mission statement – “To accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy” – hits the mark.

And finally, what competencies and capabilities must continue to be developed and invested in, in order to deliver on the mission and be competitive in the marketplace?

At its core, what sets the company apart? What is it known for to do really well, and how can it become even better?

Nike’s core competencies exist in their effective marketing strategies and innovative product design, two elements that provide much value to consumers. These competencies are not easily imitated and are leveraged to a wide variety of products and markets.

Determining the “what” for the business is not easy, especially when one is in the thick of things, managing the business – the daily grind. It requires one to step back from the day-to-day, to reflect, to question, to ponder, to debate, to test,….

It requires one to (temporarily) jump off the merry-go-round, adopt a “from the outside in” perspective, and formulate your assumptions and hypotheses before jumping back on.

Importantly – society, markets, consumers, technology change all the time, and at an increasingly accelerating pace. This means that your assumptions must continually be tested and validated, and change over time, or they risk becoming obsolete and invalid to the detriment of the firm.

Having a thinking partner can be emmensely valuable in this process – to question your assumptions and test your hypotheses. To help you crystalize “what to do” and “what not to do.” It is the critical first step before determining “how to do”. When you know where you are going, how to get there is a relatively straightforward task.

Throughout my career, I have protected and enhanced corporate reputations, saved or avoided millions for the organisations I’ve worked for and billions for the industries I’ve represented, and driven growth and profitability. All this was achieved by setting clear objectives in support of the business results we wanted.

If you need a thinking partner to help you determine what you need to do, get in touch with me.

To Disrupt or be Disrupted – that is the Question

Read Time: 2 minutes
Nanyang Business School of Singapore
1st Place Winner – John Molson MBA International Case Competition

“Connect. Innovate. Grow.” in an Age of Rapid Change and Disruption

Last week I again had the honor to serve as a lead judge to the John Molson MBA International Case Competition, organized by the John Molson School of Business at Concordia University.

It brings to Montreal students from business schools all over the world – from Canada, the US, Europe and places as far away as Australia, South Africa and Singapore (Nanyang Business School was this year’s winner!)

I’ve been doing this for the last 13 years and it is always a great start to the new year – it gets your brain cells working again after the restful holiday break! And, it is certainly energizing to see and hear from young people grappling with today’s business issues and challenges.

Disruption was the theme of this year’s competition and had the tagline “Innovate. Connect. Compete.”, not dissimilar to my own “Connect. Innovate. Grow.”

It demonstrates that connections, innovation, competition and growth are top of mind for everyone in business – both young and old(-er) – in view of the rapid and accelerating pace of change driven on by digitalization, AI, IoT, and many other disruptive technologies and business models.

So, how can you not only survive but thrive in today’s rapidly evolving business environment?

There are no quick and easy answers, but I’ve been giving this a lot of thought in my discussions with clients, business leaders, academics, policy-makers and other consultants.

I’ve come up with a Business Builder Growth Framework℠ – not quite the “theory of everything”, but perhaps helpful for developing your strategy for growth in these rapidly changing times.

The framework can serve as a blueprint for building your value creation engine – get its 6 essential elements right and it can turbocharge your growth. Read more about it in my next blog post – stay tuned!

Setting the Tone for Growth

Read Time: 13 minutes

The team at Nolinor

How giving up control will allow your company to grow

Nolinor is a Quebec-based charter airline that started operations in 1997, providing air transport services to hunting and fishing outfitters, eventually receiving permission to also provide its own aircraft maintenance. In 2004, the Prud’Homme family trust became majority shareholder and the company has been expanding rapidly since, first growing its fleet of Convair 580 aircraft and more recently acquiring a fleet of B737 aircraft. Then in 2005 came an opportunity to move operations from Montréal–Dorval International Airport to larger facilities at Montréal–Mirabel International Airport north of the city, which proved to be a milestone for the company’s growth. Shortly after, in 2006, the company was named one of the best-run enterprises in the province of Quebec by the National Bank of Canada. More recently, the company purchased a hangar at Aeroport Montréal Saint-Hubert/Longueuil and is the official carrier for the Montreal Alouettes football team. My interview is with Marco Prud’homme, Vice-President and shareholder of Nolinor.

Q:  You have a big story to tell, for a relatively young company. What’s next for you?

The vision that we had for the company has remained the same. We are listening to the customers’ needs, so we don’t have a long planning process or vision or strategy that we would need to change each year anyway. The way we envision growing the business is by listening to our customers’ needs and the need in the market and trying to address these. In that way we won’t have any aircraft stuck on the ground for long periods of time. So far, this has been pretty much the key to our success. We’re not romantics in the aviation field. We’re not here to prove a point. We’re not here to have a statue at the airport. We’re just here to listen to the customer and make sure that we find a solution that matches their needs, at a price point that is fair.

It took a few years to figure out exactly what we were doing. I mean, we were working really hard and doing a bunch of stuff, and at one point in time we had to sit down and ask, “Okay, the team is growing; why are we having success while other people are failing? What’s the difference?” We had to think about it and try to figure out exactly what was the key thing that we were doing differently from other people.

“We’re not romantics in the aviation field. We’re not here to prove a point.
We’re just here to listen to the customer and make sure that we find a solution that matches their needs,
at a price point that is fair”

Q:  So, I guess what you’re saying is, being self-aware is a key element of success for a management team.

Yes. Even if you work seven days a week, at one point you have to sit down and think a bit, try to understand what works, what’s not working, and so on. It’s not only for the management, but for anybody at a company. When we started at Nolinor, there were about 25 employees. We’re now over 275 and for sure, we cannot take everyone by the hand and explain to them in detail what they must do every day. You must put in place a culture – a way of doing things, or a way of dealing with issues. This gives leverage and empowers employees so that they can solve problems. Yes, sometimes people make mistakes, and other times they overachieve in what they set out to do. But, as long as the average is positive, people will learn from their mistakes and the company will grow.

Q:  This acceptance of failure is really part of setting yourself up for success, isn’t it? Would you say that acceptance of this at the management or leadership level is quite important?

I think it’s a game-changer in the sense that, if you’re trying to micromanage everybody inside the company, your growth will get stuck. There are only so many hours in a day and hours you can track, and there’s just no way you can micromanage everyone and everything. For many years, in an earlier business venture my family was involved in before Nolinor, we had placed a lot of importance on controlling every single decision in the company. We arrived at Nolinor with this mentality, but we soon discovered that this approach would not work. We needed a new approach – one that would give us more free time to think about how we can grow the business and acquire new customers, enter new markets, and initiate new projects. You cannot micromanage every single employee, otherwise you’re paying people for nothing.

Q:  Did this realization come from experience, or was it from talking with other businesspeople who had tried different approaches?

To be honest, it came from an issue. I left the company in 2008 for a few years, at a time when the company was stuck. My father [Nolinor President Jacques Prud’homme] could not keep up with being involved in every single decision, so he had to hire more people and he had to trust them – he found out on his own what I was trying to tell him for a long time. When I came back in 2013, I came to a completely different company. There was no intention on my part or his to go back to how we used to do things, between 1999 and 2007. I guess sometimes you learn from good experiences; sometimes you learn from bad experiences. For us, this situation created more potential for growth.

Q:  What you are describing is really a change in management style, in leadership style, that I’m seeing in younger companies that are growing very rapidly. We call that style agile, for lack of a better term, but it’s completely contrary to the traditional management approach that you’re taught in business school – the command-and-control type of approach to management that’s been instilled in society since the industrial age. I think it’s very relevant in this day of more complexity and rapid change. Would you say you’re riding the wave of that new trend in management?

I’m not sure we’re riding any trends. I guess what we’re doing right now is part of our personal business culture that we grew. My father started in aviation on his own – he was only 21 at the time. He didn’t have any formal management experience; his background of knowledge was that of a bush pilot. So, every single dollar he earned was through trial and error. Those things take time and I learned a lot from him. But I have a more academic background and so we did clash when we were trying to push new ideas.

Right now, we’ve been able to find a rhythm under which I would say that neither of those two extremes are better. Even when you manage in a very academic way, it doesn’t work. It has to be a mix of both, and it has to be a mix of trusting people who have the competency to actually deliver and keep following those people who need more guidance and who you need to grow. And, it all comes back to trying new things, and I guess my father was not always open to that. Two years ago, we hired a consulting firm to give us a hand in one area of the company. That required a very different mindset, because we used to close the door to any outside help. That was the first try, and we hit a home run on the first try. When you have those small successes, it changes your view of how you see things, and you’re more open to new experiences.

Q:  How would you describe the culture of Nolinor? Obviously, you and your father have developed a certain approach – how has that further permeated throughout the organization? How do employees embrace your central philosophy?

It’s not easy. I would say that there’s not a day that is the same. There’s no big plan for how we’re going to achieve our objectives. Once a situation comes up, before we react or do something crazy, we try to figure out exactly how we should do it and what would be the best course to take, and how can we create synergy with other stuff that we’ve put in place. It’s very hard and very much case by case.

There’s no clear-cut way of doing it, but I guess with an open mind, and the reality of it is that there are so many hours in a day. You don’t really have a choice but to test your folks with new challenges and then just trust them to deliver, and touch base with them from time to time to see what they’ve done and what works and what doesn’t work.

Q:  So, do you have teams within Nolinor that are formed spontaneously to deal with certain issues as they come up? Are they self-organizing, or how would you characterize the approach?

Because we’re in the aviation business we have this structure that we must follow, to meet Transport Canada regulations and all that. But that covers only the operation. It doesn’t cover managing change. It doesn’t cover managing growth. It doesn’t cover managing R&D. It’s a very specific task-oriented structure, so flights can leave on time, and that everything works properly and safely. But that’s only half the game.

The other aspect is trying to improve and grow the company, so for this there’s no real structure. It’s more like when there’s some new topic, or new project on the table, we have a look at who can deliver on that, and we trust that person to first get all the information she or he can gather on the subject. Then they give us their feedback, and we come up with a solution. We empower them to move forward, and we do the follow-up after that. It’s all a question of who’s best to do the job, not just who’s in the structure, who’s supposed to do it. So it’s very different. So the structure is there for regulatory purposes, but for anything else we try to figure out who’s the best person on the team to do it.

We used to have a lot of meetings. We don’t do that anymore, since these were not giving any results. We now have a structure where everybody works in different cells, and those cells are not really structured. They’re very flexible in the way they organize work. Most of the time we don’t have any timetable either, since every time you fix a deadline, there’s a surprise. When you have a very linear approach, something can happen that will throw you off. The way we look at it is that we know we are going to reach our goal. The date we’re going to reach it is not very important. It just puts extra stress on everybody, and it’s not a good way of going about it. We’re more into flow. Case in point, we started a project about a year ago and it started one way. However, during the process we found other opportunities, and we took a different approach that ultimately gave us results.

We therefore also never announce anything in advance. We announce only what we are able to close, what we are able to realize, and in that way, we only celebrate success. When we look at our competitors, they are eager to share what they’re working on. That’s not the way we work. We give a lot of information on what we accomplish, and don’t share much on what we’re working on.

Q:  So, you’re quite opportunistic in your approach, scanning for opportunities and then gauge whether you can make a difference?

I would say that for an important project to get closed, and delivered, there might be between 10 to 20 other projects that we’ll just cancel along the way. Opportunities come and go, and you have to make the right call at the right time. Sometimes timing is everything.

I’ll give you a past example, which is quite funny in retrospect. We were considering equipping our aircraft with iPads so that people could view movies. At one point in time, having an iPad was something rare, and when they came out we looked at that possibility. Today, it’s a no brainer that this project would have failed. Everybody has an iPad or a smartphone device on which to watch a movie. So, sometimes it’s like, we look at a project that seems interesting, but at some point, upon closer inspection and reflection somebody will raise their hand and say, “Well, there might be an easier way,” or “Do we really need to do that? What’s the ROI on that?” and “Why are we doing this? Did we fall in love with this idea, or do our customers really need that?”

We’ve put in place a system that encourages every passenger to give us feedback on the flight they’ve taken. It’s a very simple process, and we’re able to gather a bunch of information that we didn’t have before. And, with this information we can go back to our customer and say, “Oh, by the way, your passengers on this particular charter flight do not appreciate this feature, or the departure time,” or so on. We’re able to give that feedback to the customer so that a contract that may have started out in a certain way, will end up being improved with an easy solution that works, I would say, 80% of the time. And, we get this information for almost nothing – from our passengers.

It’s all a question of giving the tools to the right people, trusting them to find the right path, and not being romantic about your own ideas. This also means that if the president or I have a concept, or an idea, and once we put it on the table it’s very important to understand that we don’t own that idea anymore. If somebody comes and destroys it, or changes it, or modifies it, or finds something better, it’s very important that you don’t take it personally, because once it’s out in the open – inside the company – it’s for everyone to improve it and ownership no longer rests with any specific person. That gives a lot more leverage for people to take risks, I think.

“It’s all a question of giving the tools to the right people, trusting them to find the right path,
and not being romantic about your own ideas. This also means that [if you have an idea] and once [you]
put it on the table, it’s very important to understand that [you] don’t own that idea anymore”

Q:  So, would you say that it’s a completely open, and transparent work environment you have created that encourages creativity and ideas?

Yeah, but it’s not always easy since the natural reflex is to intervene and decide. However, if you’re able to take the time, and I guess, sleep over it, and then come back the following morning, you’ll have a more clear view on it. Everybody has the same goal – we all want Nolinor to thrive and be a success. How to achieve that can be viewed differently by other people. So, you must sit back and relax, and say, “Well, that’s completely different from what we had in mind, but it’s not a bad idea, and it’s actually cheaper, and it’s actually better,” and so on. Because if every time you cut someone off or find a way to just destroy what they’ve worked on, nobody will want to jump in and do something new. You have to give people the right feedback, so they can thrive.

Q:  It’s counter intuitive, isn’t it? Give up control to gain more control in terms of where you are going as a company.

Yeah, and this is true not only in the aviation field, but in many other fields. Sometimes you meet people, and they micromanage their team so much that you kind of wonder why they’re paying their employees a significant salary when, at the end of the day, they don’t allow them to make any decisions. If your management team or your team leaders can’t make any decisions, then you don’t really have a need for them. Their job then becomes more about managing email.

For myself, I try to send as little email as possible. I prefer to have a one-on-one chat with someone and help solve an issue quickly. I guess, if you’re sending an email for someone to confirm or share information, that’s okay. But if you’re sending an email to solve a problem, then you’re only creating a bigger problem. You need to talk with people. People do not send me any long emails. I don’t read them. I have given that scope to everybody, that if they send me an email after 9 o’clock, or if they send me an email that is more than a couple of lines long, I won’t read it. So, they don’t waste time writing long emails. If they have something to say, the door is always open, and they can just sit down, and we can talk about it, solve the issue, and move on. Because, otherwise you’re just managing email. The purpose of email was never to take up 100% of your waking hours while at work. It’s a tool, not a job.

Q:  As Nolinor grows, how do you avoid what has been called the bureaucracy trap, in that procedures are created, and systems, and so forth, to keep everyone kind of moving in a certain direction?

Well the one thing that has happened over the last few years is that we have someone inside the company who had the great idea to create an information system under which almost the entire the operation is now managed. We share all information, i.e. schedules, travel, employee profiles, flight schedules, airport information – everything is within that system that was built in-house. We have two people working full-time on upgrading the system with new features. It has cost a lot of money so far, but it has saved way more, and has made it possible for us to reduce the amount of paperwork, and bureaucracy inside Nolinor by a factor of maybe five. The system has taken a lot of time to build and now we just keep improving it. Our mindset is now more into connecting with our customer. This system is now part of our customer service, and our customer receives real-time information about their flight. That’s something that’s not been done before by any other carrier that we know of. I’m not talking about only basic information – I mean very important information. We share a lot of information with our customers. We have created a need for them and it’s automated, so we don’t have somebody sending emails to customers like we used to do in the old days.

Q:  Then, the trends that we’re seeing – more and more digitalization, automation, the use of AI – are you staying in tune with this?

We try to. If you have some spare time, you must go outside your business and see what new opportunities exist and learn about new ways of doing things. I purposely don’t attend any of our industry trade shows. I’m always into stuff that is not related to aviation, because that’s the only way to find other opportunities or ways of doing things that are not present in our own industry. You can’t just simply copy what everybody else is doing; you need to do things that nobody is doing.

Many of our management travels the world, attending different events, getting training, or learning new skills and tools. Sometimes you look at the budget and say, “Ooh, why are we spending so much money on that?” It’s not like we expect an employee to come back with a great idea every time we send them somewhere. But maybe they’ll meet someone and that someone might call him six months after with an opportunity, and so it’s very hard to figure out the ROI on that. Every time we have something that works really well, and we go back down the line to track down its origin, it comes back to somebody who was in touch and learned about something new.

We also share a lot of books. I like reading a lot, every time I read a good book – it could be on management, or marketing, or something completely different – I tend to share it and encourage others to read and share it with somebody else.

Q:  You are creating a learning environment and connecting on the edge, if you will, which is where innovation really happens. It doesn’t happen in your own little world. It happens on the exterior of your world.

That’s right, so you have to be open to that. You have to have an interest in learning and trying new stuff. I’m not interested in being aware of the new type of oil that’s going to go inside an aircraft. For me, that has zero value. It really comes down to how we manage things, how we grow customers, how we get more visibility on the Internet, how we treat people, how we train and grow our people. Those are the issues that, for me, are more complex and more interesting than what is going to be the next type of aircraft we’re going to buy. Because basically, we’re not buying aircraft to fulfil our own personal dream. We’re buying aircraft to be able to provide a service our customers want and need.

Like what you’ve read? Add a comment below or subscribe to our blog by adding your email address to the form at the bottom of the page.

From Drones Beware to Flight Aware with Unifly

Read Time: 12 minutes

Marc Kegelaers, CEO, Unifly – www.unifly.aero

How one company is raising the level of awareness in the airspace

As more and more drones take to the sky, and ambitions for drone delivery services and beyond-visual-line-of-sight (BVLOS) operations, the airspace will become increasingly congested. Concerns over hazards to commercial manned aviation are well-founded with calls for regulation. At the same time,  regulators are cautioned not to introduce rules that will run roughshod over an emerging industry full of potential. A solution is needed to inform drone operators where they can and cannot fly, and allow for the safe integration of drones into the airspace – a solution called UTM, or unmanned aircraft system (UAS) traffic management.

In this installment of the Vantage Point interview series on innovation in aviation, I speak with Marc Kegelaers, CEO of Unifly, an award-winning software company that has developed such a solution – a platform for the safe integration of drones into the airspace.

Q:  How did you initially come across the technology and the application of the technology that’s now Unifly?

My background is in aviation. I’m a flight instructor, and for 10 years I ran a flight school that trained professional pilots. While there, I started a department to train pilots for aircraft without pilots, i.e. drones. That was bringing in some publicity for the school, and at an exhibition in Asia, I came across a few young guys – air traffic controllers and a scientist – who had this idea for a traffic management system for drones. They already had a good prototype, which apparently had won some international prizes. They wanted to create a company and asked if I was prepared to be their CEO. I thought, “Well, this is a good idea!” I looked at the technology, what they were doing, and their plans and ambitions. That was in July three years ago, when I decided to join in as a CEO and shareholder. The company was started a month later, and two months after I started to work full time for Unifly. I had to unwind my function as CEO of the flight academy, so I handed that over to a successor, then started to work on the Unifly initiative full-time in October 2015.

Q:  We are experiencing a renaissance of innovation – digitalization, artificial intelligence, autonomization,…. How do you see Unifly within this broader picture of innovation and what’s going on outside of your immediate area of play?

I’d like to think that we are a ground-breaking company. We are very innovative. If you look at what is happening in the world, there’s a fourth Industrial Revolution going on whereby many activities will be driven by robotics and artificial intelligence. We are very much a part of that.

One of the key challenges that exists today is that you have this drone technology which is advancing at a very high pace – and everyone knows that drone technology and robotics are going to be very important – but specifically with drones, they are coming into a world where there is already a lot of traffic. Drones will have to comply with the regulations and rules of the aviation, so it remains safe.

The challenge we have, and I think the entire industry has, is that on one hand you have the world of aviation, which is very safety-driven, but air traffic controllers and pilots have never had to deal with drone operators. On the other hand, you have drone operators who have never been aware of the regulations and the rules that exist in aviation that make it very safe, who now want to have access to the airspace. So we have two different worlds: one relatively conservative world driven by safety, and another world which is innovative and moving very fast, not fully aware of all of the safety rules. Marrying those two totally different worlds, that’s the big challenge. But it’s now happening in aviation, and I’m sure that will happen everywhere in the world.

Look at all the challenges that are now present in the world of autonomous cars, for instance. The technology exists for cars to be driven autonomously, but how do you mix the traffic of autonomous cars with the traffic of non-autonomous cars? That’s the big challenge. In the world of aviation, we are addressing this challenge.

Q:  How do you bridge those two worlds? Does it require a change in mindset that the more traditional industries have adopted over time, or do you see the innovators having to adopt a different mindset?

It’s both. Every traditional industry has its way of doing things, which work fine. The aviation industry is very safety-minded, with good ATM (air traffic management) systems and so on and so forth, and that works fine. Now with new technology, there’s this mindset that needs to change.

Two years ago, I was at a big conference where you had CEOs of large ATM organizations, and questions were asked of the audience. One of the questions was, “Do you think technology will change the nature of your industry within the next 20 years?” I was baffled to hear one-third of the audience say, “No, we don’t think that technology will change the nature of our industry.” That, to me, says that within those classical industries, there’s still a mindset among people who do not see that there’s a lot of technology out there that can actually help them become better and automate more processes. And not only in the aviation industry – I think in many traditional industries that’s the case.

Q:  Indeed, we’ve seen the same in the car industry, until Elon Musk came along and introduced the concept of the electronic car and things started to change. Even going back to telecommunications, you had the postal, telegraph, and telephone service (or PTT) – monopoly service providers that the public was not at all happy with for the level of service and the cost. I think, only when that industry was deregulated, have we seen the kind of things that we now have, our smartphones and so forth. Do you see that kind of institutional deregulation having to take place to make real change happen in aviation? Particularly, I’m thinking about ATM and the interfacing between ATM and UTM

It will take place. What is happening is that we, as a company, are creating the technology to provide highly automated air traffic management for large amounts of autonomous devices. That’s what we’re doing. That’s where we’re going with our technology. Once you’ve done that with large numbers of autonomous drones flying in very difficult airspace, low level airspace, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand that you could actually take that technology and start using it for traditional manned aviation. My guess, and I think this will happen, is that the technology we’re building now will gradually – not overnight, but gradually – find its way into the management of manned aviation.

The technology we’re using is vested in Internet technology, which makes a UTM system much more affordable and accessible than an ATM system. The technological change that happened in the telecommunications industry about 30 years ago is starting to happen in the world of aviation. The transformation will be a bit slower than what happened in telecommunications because of the safety aspect. You must be very careful that you do not innovate as rapidly as in the telecommunications industry, because you still have manned aviation transporting large numbers of people in the air. You cannot afford to have accidents. In the telecommunications industry, if you lose a data packet, well, you lose a packet. There’s no harm there. The software will say, “Oh, I lost a packet,” and it will send a new packet. In manned aviation, you cannot lose an airplane. That’s why the transition will be a bit slower, but it will come for sure.

Q:  When we look at the softer side of things – the people element – I would hazard to guess that the way Unifly is organized and how you do things is quite different from a traditional ATM technology company or an air navigation service provider. Aside from the technology, it’s also about people and how we work to get things done. I’m thinking particularly in terms of a more agile approach to software development that’s now permeating to other areas of the business. Do you see change taking place in that area as well?

Yes. To ask me purely from the perspective of the man/machine interface and the world of air traffic management, the user interfaces all assume that the person that is manning the systems has had years of training and is an ATM professional. That means it can be very complex, because the person has been trained.

Now in the world of UTM, you are interfacing with a world of people that have no knowledge, or very limited knowledge, of aviation and air traffic management. Still, you want to give them the same information as is now being used in the world of manned aviation, but in a very, very user-friendly manner. That’s one of the big transformations we are making happen.

Also, in the ATM industry or the aviation industry in general, it is expected that the number of flights will double between now and 2030. Already today we’re seeing record numbers of flights flying through the airspace, which puts a strain on the entire ATM system, because all the procedures in the world of air traffic management are manual procedures and involve people talking to people. The growth of manned aviation will require much more automation than is currently the case, and we’re building the foundation for this with UTM. So, it’s interesting times ahead.

From a development point of view, we use agile software methodology, the same methodologies as are used in developing Internet-type applications. In very short turnaround times, we use a Spring Methodology that enables us to be very quick and still have very high quality.

Q:  So, when you’ve signed up with a new client, such as an ANSP, what would be the average turnaround time to provide them with the necessary tools to start managing, or having some oversight over drones in the airspace?

From a technology point of view, not very much. The fastest we’ve done this is about six weeks. The challenge really is with the organization itself. One of the challenges that an ANSP or CAA (civil aviation authority) has is the processing of flight plans for flight approvals. There is a flight plan system that is used in manned aviation, and it involves a manual process – your flight plan gets looked at by someone, and that someone approves it. That’s based on a certain number of flights per day, per week, and so on.

Now with drones, what we’ve seen initially is that the ANSPs and the CAAs have wanted to use their existing processes of flight approvals and apply that to drones as well. But, guess what? They did not anticipate that the number of requests for drone operations would be much, much, much higher than the number for manned aviation. So, what we are providing are the tools to automate a lot of the processes within an ANSP and a CAA. However, the organization has to accept it and processes have to be created or modified so that they can work with these new tools. The delays we see, or the length of time it takes to implement our software, is not technology-related, and we already have quite a bit of technology available. It’s about presenting the technology to the client, having them work with the technology, and for their organization to define internal processes to make sure that they can use the technology as often as possible. That’s the challenge we have. Typically, we work with an ANSP, and they use our systems for a while in tests and trials – not to test and trial the technology itself, because it works – but to test and trial their internal procedures, to decide who will do what and who will have what responsibility, and how to manage the different users of the system.

Q:  Would you say that it’s then a bit of a journey for the two partners – Unifly and the client – towards solutions that are needed as part of an iterative process? In other words, there is a tendency within traditional businesses to want to buy a complete system or a complete solution as opposed to pursuing a more agile methodology of iterative testing and development. Is this mindset something you’re up against with some of the more traditional organizations you deal with?

No, in fact what we have is a complete system. But, implementing a complete system is a big, big task and we’ve created a methodology to implement the system in phases. The first phase is always, get the public informed about aviation rules and regulations, and where a drone operator can and cannot fly. That’s something that can be turned around very, very quickly. That’s usually the first phase.

The next phase is getting people to issue flight plans. We build function after function so that ultimately you get a full-blown system, possibly after a year or a year-and-a-half. The initial implementations can already be available after a few weeks. So, our experience is in fact that the ANSPs tend to want to work in a phased approach where they say, “Okay, in phase one we want to do this, then in phase two we want to do this.” The only problem with such an approach is that sometimes – as we’ve seen in other industries that have taken this approach – you can end up with piecemeal solutions. For example, just for providing information to operators they use one vendor, for tracking they use another vendor, and then for other functions, other vendors. So, they end up using isolated solutions for individual problems without thinking of the bigger picture. This usually means we have to convince an ANSP to think of the bigger picture and make sure all of the problems they want to solve are addressed in an integrated fashion rather than having a series of piecemeal solutions.

Q:  So, it’s really about the partnership relationship you build with your clients that is quite important. Having that trust there, I think would be a key issue for evolving the solutions that may need to be built. Would that be a true statement?

Yes, that’s very much a true statement. The entire process of implementing a complete UTM system with an ANSP is quite intense. Luckily we now have experience with several customers. We also are involved right now in several research programs in Europe that deal with UTM. We are seen as a company that knows about drone traffic management. We know about manned aviation because that’s the world we came from. So, we are seen by large organizations – ANSPs and CAAs – as a valuable partner that can actually bring a lot of value and knowhow to the table, helping them to tackle this quite complex UTM problem.

Q:  You’re not the only game in town, of course. There are other UTM providers. Do you see potentially, not necessarily a monopoly service provider model develop, but more of a competitive landscape where you have different systems within a certain geographic region – much like you have with the mobile phone networks where you’ve got a federation of systems able to interface with each other? Do you see that kind of a model develop eventually?

Ultimately, that will be the model, but it will take some time. The system and technology that we have developed takes that in mind. There will be in an area in a country, in a region, where there will be multiple UTM systems. So, we’ll be able to say, “Okay, I want to be a customer of A or B or C.” There will be different levels of service or different services that people can buy from different UTM service providers. Specifically, in the United States that is the model that has been chosen from day one. In Europe and other parts of the world, it’s first and foremost the ANSP that wants to make sure aviation safety is guaranteed, so they take the initiative. But ultimately, there will be a time when multiple UTM service providers will exist in a country. However, there will always be some level of oversight provided by the national aviation authority.

We must remember that the aviation authorities have the responsibility for ensuring the safety of the airspace. This responsibility does not just go away with the advent of drones. On the contrary, they now have an additional problem that they need to solve. Some ANSPs have taken the view that the only thing they want is to ensure everyone has a same exact aeronautical data, and that the ANSP does the coordination with manned aviation and all drone operator interfacing would be done by the UTM service provider. Other ANSPs have said “no” to this from the beginning, and that they want to do all of the interfacing with the drone operators as well.

Q:  It’s been an interesting ride so far, but I’m sure there have been some real challenges along the way. What are some of the lessons learned that have resulted in a different approach than originally thought?

So far, the trajectory has been quite unique in the sense that what we set out to do from the beginning, we are still thinking of doing that. One of the biggest lessons we’ve had is that initially when we started the company, we wanted to build, first of all, a product for the drone users to do planning and so on so forth, but we saw very quickly that that was not the best approach.

The best approach was that first and foremost we have to have a good, solid backbone that will be able to process large amounts of information, and be able to process that information in real time as the system for mission critical applications. Once you have that and you’ve created that as an open platform, then you start adding user interfaces. That’s something we learned after a few months. It’s having that very solid backbone – that open platform – that made us quite successful.

The other thing that we’ve learned is – listen to the customer, listen very carefully to what he wants because he’s very clever. We also learned that as a ground-breaking company – a very innovative company – you must be an evangelist. This is new technology and we’re probably the first to build a lot of experience in UTM. I think one of the roles that we have as a company is to say, “Okay, the management of drones is a very complex thing to do, but these are the ways to do it.”

Q:  You continue to get a lot of interest, I suspect, from other entrepreneurs, but also from venture capital. How does that aspect of the business look for you?

Yes, we get a lot of press, and a lot of interest from potential customers. We literally have contacts all over the world. We get contacted by VCs quite a bit who would like to invest in our company, and by universities and such, who invite me to speak about what we do, how to create an innovative company, and how we get the message out to potential customers all over the world.

Like what you’ve read? Add a comment below or subscribe to our blog by adding your email address to the form at the bottom of the page.

Keep Moving to Stay Relevant

Read Time: 1 minuteDo you remember when you first learned how to ride a bike? I do….

I was almost 10 years old and most of my friends were already pros on the 2-wheeler. I did not have a bike with training wheels (long story) and kept falling over and hurting myself. It was a painful experience and I was afraid to keep trying.

Until one day my aunt insisted I give it another try. She gave me a hard push and told me to pedal hard. I did, and I kept moving!

It was a most exhilarating feeling. I was going faster than I had ever gone before. Wind in my face, passing people by, and going further than I had ever gone. Seeing new and unfamiliar places.

I was experiencing freedom and independence.

I even discovered that to slow down and stop without falling over, all I had to do was put out my two feet on the pavement until I came to a halt. I had mastered riding a bike in that one afternoon.

Now, I did fall on occasion, but that was because I broke the cardinal rule – pedal fast!

And so it is in life and in business. We must keep pedaling and moving.

In a rapidly changing world we must continually adapt and innovate to stay relevant.

We must engage in a continuous cycle of experimentation, learn from our successes and failures, and apply new-found knowledge and insight to the next round of innovation, and do so with speed.

From this comes stability and resiliance.

Albert Einstein had it right when he said, “Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance, you must keep moving.”

Indeed, if you stand still, you will fall over and hurt yourself.

The 5 Trends Shaping the Future of Aviation

Read Time: 5 minutes

What Are You Doing to Remain Relevant?

“Day 2 is stasis. Followed by irrelevance. Followed by excruciating, painful decline. Followed by death. And that is why it is always Day 1.” Those were the words of Jeff Bezos during Amazon’s all-hands meeting held last year in response to the question what Day 2 would look like. He continued with what he felt were some of the essentials for Day 1 defense, on how to fend off Day 2.

Among these essentials was the eager adoption of external trends – “These big trends affecting our world are not hard to spot,…. If you won’t or can’t embrace them quickly – or if you fight them – you will probably be fighting the future. Embrace them and you have a tailwind,” said Bezos. I absolutely agree, and I like the aviation analogy!

For those not familiar with aviation terms used as business jargon, a tailwind is a wind that blows in the direction of travel and increases an aircraft’s in-flight speed and reduces the time required to reach its destination. Thus, in business a “tailwind” refers to a situation or condition that will ramp up top-line or bottom-line growth, preferably both.

Every organisation – both large and small, public or private, for profit or not-for-profit – should be aware of today’s big trends that can become tailwinds to a more prosperous future.

As you read the following top five trends that are shaping the future of aviation, ask yourself some profound and important questions: “How can these trends impact our business? What capabilities do we need to build to exploit them and continue to delight our customers? How can they take our business to that next level of performance and value creation?”

Artificial Intelligence and machine learning goes mainstream

AI is quickly becoming a mainstream obsession that will affect every industry. In aviation, algorithms are learning to predict aircraft delays, giving airports and airlines a better chance at avoiding them.

Airlines like EasyJet and Emirates are using AI to redesign the ticketing process and improve the in-flight experience to cater to customer expectations.

But the real promise is in the cockpit, where AI autopilots could help manage the complex airline operation and even respond to emergencies as they arise in the cockpit.

For the moment, AI is augmented intelligence, i.e. man plus machine, where AI augments human performance. Instead of replacing productive workers, the use of AI technology will be pervasive – from piloting an aircraft, to aircraft maintenance and air traffic control, and to training and simulation – and is being used to amplify human performance.

The introduction of AI will be subtle but it’s taking hold as the pressures to improve performance continues to grow.

Ask yourself :

How can we exploit AI to enhance the performance of people?

How can we delight our customers with new insights this technology can give us?

Automation achieves dramatic growth

Automation, driven by data analytics, AI and advanced hardware, is set to disrupt work as we know it. We’re automating traditional jobs out of existence on a regular basis.

In the automotive industry, autonomous vehicles are fast-becoming a reality, and it will be a game changer for the trucking industry where it is forecast that there simply won’t be enough drivers.

Similarly, with the forecast pilot shortage, it is not hard to imagine that remotely-piloted commercial aircraft – first for cargo, followed by passenger aircraft – will take to the sky. And, while still some years off, as AI and further automation takes hold, we will eventually see a transition from remotely-piloted aircraft to fully autonomous aircraft, capable of self-separation and flying the most efficient flight trajectories.

The air traffic management function will therefore also see a major change, with increased use of AI and automation driving out the traditional function of the air traffic controller and heralding in the air traffic manager responsible for monitoring the efficiency of traffic flows.

Ask yourself :

What jobs in our organisation are ready to be automated out of existence?

What skills and capabilities do we need to build, and what does this mean for our training and development programs?

Experience management is the new quality management

Brought on by digital mobile technology and the online economy, customers today want companies to provide a consistently wonderful experience from beginning to end. And, if the experience meets expectations, customers will be willing to spend more.

We’ve seen this with Apple, Nike, Starbucks and other brands that have created a following and an entire ecosystem to support the customer experience.

There is no reason not to expect the same will happen in air transport where offerings are marketed that uniquely cater to the traveller’s needs and desires. Customers are looking for travel companies that fit with who they are and what they value. They want to work with companies that support the values, causes and ideals they support.

Quality is a given, and this is not something companies will be rewarded or recognized for. Quality is expected, and it’ll be an afterthought.

This shift in consumer expectations will require a whole new approach to customer engagement, and some airlines have only recently started to explore how this can be achieved.

Ask yourself :

What type of experience would our customers value most?

What would have them coming back for more, and evolve into a following?

Blockchain everything

While Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies have received a lot of public attention lately, it is the underlying technology that is truly revolutionary and will disrupt several industries as well as government services.

In essence, blockchain is a different way to process transactions or records that does not require intermediation. Put simply, blockchain is a ledger of digital events that can be shared and trusted without the need for central authority.

Importantly, the blockchain resides in the cloud and isn’t located on only one computer, but on many computers, and every computer is directly in contact with all other computers in the blockchain network. Due to this constant synchronisation, it is tamper-proof and establishes trust in a transaction. This allows the transfer of anything of value between two parties without the need of an intermediary.

Blockchain is emerging in healthcare as well as financial tech.

In air transport, the technology can be the basis for virtual or digital passports that store biometrics in the form of a single secure token on a mobile or wearable device of the passport holder.

Further potential usage would be in baggage tracking, cargo manifests, aircraft history and maintenance records, aircraft spare parts logistics and a lot more.

Ask yourself:

What transactions can be simplified and made more secure using blockchain technology?

How can it affect our supply chain and what ecosystems must be built?

IoT to friendlier skies

As the costs of Internet-connected sensors and networking equipment continue to fall, IoT (Internet of Things) technologies will continue to play a bigger role in efforts to make aviation more efficient and improve the passenger experience.

While aircraft components such as engines have been providing real-time IoT data on everything from performance to required maintenance for some time, other industry players are increasingly finding new ways to deploy and use IoT technologies.

Airports are deploying interconnected sensor networks and data hubs to track and understand passenger flows and behaviour in the airport terminal to drive retail revenues, reduce connection times or improve the boarding process. And on the airport premises, airlines and airports are using IoT technologies to locate and keep track of their equipment.

Ask yourself :

Which activities can we learn more from through increased or improved monitoring?

Which of our processes can be improved or made more efficient if we had more data?

Keeping abreast of the trends affecting our world is of strategic importance and requires that you revisit your core assumptions on a regular basis. I observe that far too many executives devote their time to managing the day-to-day operation, and not nearly enough time to strategic and innovative thinking. Are you devoting equal time and energy to both?

Business resilience is about adapting quickly to trends and technological disruption as much as it is about maintaining and safeguarding the business operation. In the end, it is all about staying relevant, by continually and perpetually innovating and creating business value. How can today’s trends become tailwinds for you and your business?

P.S. Jeff Bezos’ 2016 letter to shareholders can be found here. I look forward to reading his 2017 letter, expected in the coming month.

Cost-cut Yourself to Prosperity

Read Time: 2 minutes

Cost reduction as a strategy for rapid growth

During my career, I have saved millions of dollars for the organisations I’ve worked for and helped avoid billions of dollars for the industry I’ve represented. Cost reduction and cost containment is the name of the game in the air transport industry. Over the course of the last 60 years, the airlines have not been able to make an adequate return on the cost of capital employed, with profit margins being less than 1% on average over the period. Net profit margins of close to 5% in recent years are truly exceptional, and are the result of strong demand, improved efficiency and reduced interest payments. But operating margins are being squeezed again by rising fuel, labor and infrastructure expenses, and thus cost management will continue to play a crucial strategic role. And herein lies a useful lesson for any industry and any business.

Last week I spoke of price simplification, whereby you dramatically reduce the price of the product or service by making its delivery simpler, thereby reducing its cost. This can be achieved in one of two ways, through both product redesign and business process redesign. Through product redesign you can reduce the product or service offering to its bare essentials and nothing else. Think of Southwest Airlines, and other low-cost carriers that offer no complimentary food or drink, no reserved seating, no lounges, and no free baggage handling. You can also reduce the variety on offer, as in the case of an airline reducing multiple class travel to a single class, as the low-cost airlines have done. For a product, think of the simple Swatch that provides the basic function of telling time, but not much else that more complicated and luxurious watches do.

Once the product has been simplified, its cost of delivery can be further reduced through business process redesign, for a simple and standardized product can be produced more easily and efficiently through automation and mass production. In the process, an entirely new mass market can be created through an accelerator effect that can cut the price of the product or service by half or more. The classic example is that of the Ford Model T, which was designed in such a way that it could be easily mass produced on the production line. It became the affordable car for the masses. The most successful low-cost airlines have simplified and standardized their product and redesigned their business processes to such an extent that traditional carriers have had a hard time to compete.

During my days with KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, while in the midst of yet another cost reduction initiative, I was told by those who questioned such draconian practice, “you cannot cost-cut yourself to prosperity.” At the time, I felt there was some truth in that. Today, I couldn’t disagree more! A sure way to prosperity and profitable growth is to cut costs – dramatically – for it has been proven that radical price reduction will lead to an exponential growth in demand and the creation of a new market.

The Beauty of Simplicity

Read Time: 3 minutes

And what it can mean for your business or organisation

Last week I wrote about the difference between the complicated and the complex, and its implications for your approach to introducing change, which requires leadership more than it does management skill. However, the implications are even more profound than this.

In an increasingly complex world punctuated by rapid and disruptive change, organizations must become more flexible, agile and nimble, and let go of centralized hierarchical command-and-control styles of management. Individual behaviors and decisions in reaction to the unpredictable are rather more important than executive strategies and organisational plans that rely on predictability to be effective. Individual leadership and self-organization suddenly become more important than management control. Encouraging conflict and change become necessary – even to the extent of testing the stability of the organisation – in order to cultivate a culture of creativity and innovation.

But there is a problem. If organisations in today’s world are to operate at the edge of chaos, how can they maintain a balance between flexibility and stability to avoid from failing? Without clear plans and directives, how can individuals in organizations make decisions in today’s information-saturated and rapidly-changing business environment? By determining what’s important and what’s not. By freeing yourself from complexity and committing to simplicity.

Simplicity – the art of reducing the complex to its simple essence – can give you the power to get stuff done, to be more effective, to be more efficient, and ultimately, to create more value. Many books have been written about this, in fields as diverse as theology and spirituality, to psychology, ecology and biology, design and architecture, communication and politics, as well as business theory and strategy. In business, it has been observed that those companies that are most successful, are not only market leaders, but have also embraced the principle of simplicity. However, achieving simplicity is not easy. As Steve Jobs once observed, “Simple can be harder than complex: You have to work hard to get your thinking clean to make it simple. But it’s worth it in the end because once you get there, you can move mountains.”

As identified by Richard Koch in his book entitled Simplify and co-authored with Greg Lockwood, there are two ways simplification can be achieved – through price simplification or through proposition simplification. With price simplification, you are dramatically reducing the price of the product or service by making its delivery simpler, thereby reducing its cost. Think of Southwest Airlines or Ryanair – one class travel with no frills, a fleet comprised of one aircraft-type, service to secondary airports, and direct selling to customers. Think of Henry Ford and the Model T. Think of McDonald’s and fast food. Think of IKEA and functional inexpensive furniture. Think of Inditex of the Zara brand and fast fashion….

With proposition simplification, you are providing a product or service that is simple, easy to use and intuitive, and generally appealing, which can create an entirely new market and ecosystem. Think of Apple and its iMac, iPhone, iPod, iPad, and more recently the iWatch. Think of Amazon that pioneered on-line book sales for a more convenient consumer experience, which was enhanced by book reviews and suggestions and easy “1-click” payment. It has gone on to create a massive on-line marketplace that allows other sellers to participate and now offers a wide range of products for sale.

This is the power of simplicity in business – making the complex more simple, and creating value and new markets. By working smarter, not harder, by creating more flexible and adaptive organizations, and by creating more compelling experiences for consumers, companies can find new paths to growth and prosperity.

“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” – Leonardo da Vinci

The Difference between the “Complicated” and the “Complex”

Read Time: 3 minutes

And its implications for your approach to introducing change

What’s the difference between sending a rocket into space and getting children to succeed in school? What’s the difference between a surgeon extracting a brain tumour and judge and jury deciding guilt or innocence for a person accused of murder? Answers: sending a rocket into space and surgeons extracting brain tumours are complicated tasks, while getting children to succeed in school and the criminal justice system to function properly are complex activities.

Complicated activities like rocket launchings and brain surgery require engineer-designed blueprints, step-by-step algorithms and procedures, well-trained staff, computer software and special equipment. A complicated system assumes expert and rational leaders, top-down planning, smooth implementation of policies and procedures, and a clock-like organisation of tasks to be performed.

Complicated systems operate in standardised ways and everything is done to improve performance and reduce uncertainty and mistakes. The emphasis is on process and procedure, command and control. This is much like what happens in the cockpit when flying an airplane. Yet, even those sophisticated systems fail from time to time when an anomaly enters the picture, such as smoke in the cockpit that led to the fatal crash of Swissair 111 off the coast of Nova Scotia in 1998.

Complex systems like education and criminal justice, however, involve interactions between numerous players of varied expertise, independence and inter-dependence. They are rather unpredictable and uncontrollable, and can produce surprises, primarily due to the participation of and interaction between people.

Complex systems are constantly evolving and adaptive. Blueprints, technical experts, strategic plans and managers simply are inadequate to get complex systems to operate effectively. Think of the interface between front-line airline staff and their customers – the passenger. Often when dealing with complex situations such as flight delays, these require good judgement and leadership on the part of customer-facing staff, as opposed to following strict operating procedures. One only needs to be reminded of the incident when a passenger was dragged off a United Airline flight in April.

The practical implications of this distinction between the complicated and the complex is that the approach to dealing with situations and change needs to be different. Those who run complicated systems can introduce change by laying out a detailed design of what is to be changed, step-by-step procedures to implement the change and overcome employee resistance, and reduce variation in performance once the change is implemented. It is a highly rational, mechanical approach that can be managed, much like a machine.

However, this will hardly work for those who inhabit complex systems where conflict and unplanned changes occur all the time. Imposing procedures from complicated organisations onto complex systems are bound to fail. Working in a complex system means adapting to changes, dealing with conflicts, and constant learning. Introducing reform requires leadership. Management is about control; leadership is about change.

Most organisations exhibit both complicated and complex environments – just think of airline operations, a highly complicated activity, versus sales and marketing and customer service, which are highly complex activities. Employees, and particularly those at more senior levels, must be able to recognise the environment in which they are interacting and adjust their style accordingly – to that of the manager or that of the leader, and often it is a subtle combination of both.

Lessons from the Demise of a Venerable Pâtisserie

Read Time: 2 minutes
Anyone who has been to Montreal will know it to be the gastronomic capital of Canada, if not North America. Of course, many other cities have their fine eateries, but Montreal boasts a great variety and diversity in establishments, from expensive Michelin-starred gourmet and nouvelle cuisine restaurants, to bistro-bars, coffee and pastry shops, bagel shops, and international cuisine the world over – Italian, Portuguese, Spanish tapas, Vietnamese, Chinese, Japanese, Indian, not to mention the Irish and British pubs sprinkled throughout.

It is a fiercely competitive food scene, with celebrity chefs and restaurateurs vying for your palate, and there is therefore tremendous churn, with establishments folding and new ones popping up on a regular basis. Yet, there are those venerable establishments that have survived for decades. So, it came as a shock to many Montrealers when Pâtisserie de Cascogne closed its doors today after 60 years in the business.

Founded in 1957 by Francis Cabanes and his wife Lucie, who had emigrated from France, de Gascogne was Montreal’s preeminent pâtisserie whose reputation was well-known, especially during its heyday in the ‘80s and ‘90s. Renowned as a classic French pâtisserie, de Gascogne was the place to go to order a cake for that special occasion like a wedding or birthday, and during the Christmas season for a Bûche de Noël.

However, something was amiss the last decade or so. Certainly, les Montréalais have become more health conscious, opting for less fattening and sweet foods. Then came new competitors like Au Pain Doré and Première Moisson that specialised in bread, but also offered cakes and pastries at lower prices. And, countless other innovative pâtisseries and chocolateries sprang up in the city, offering their own specialities for which they became renowned. Comparatively, de Cascogne was expensive and had lost its edge. Most significantly, its sales staff had become rather snooty and aloof, a sure sign that it had rested on its laurels far too long. And herein lies some lessons for any business:

  1. Always remain on the cutting edge of innovation;
  2. Always remain close to your clients; and
  3. Always serve your clients well.