Robert Crandall

[ULM148]

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 Think were talking about apples and oranges. What you are describing is an over controlling CEO. What i'm talking about is layer's that distort accountabilities. Insulation, which is how AA currently uses micro management. It seems that somewhere within this post Crandall world is where AA's management team is lost while flurishing. Either by break down of communication, Accountability, direction, or action. There seem's to be no cohesion. The company is failing and has been for 8 years in a row, this is not at the fault of it's non management employee's. Someone is responsible at the end of the day! There are no ticket agents involved in decision making, nor pilots, nor mechanics, nor cabin cleaners or fleet service. At the end of the day it is all about management for the viability, success and or failure.

How many VP's when Crandall was in office??

56 was Carty. The boom of the bloating!

 

[ULM148]

Crandall had Under 20? 30? 40? 50? The answer is what i'm talking about. AA's road to struggle started right here.

 

[eolesen]

What i'm talking about is layer's that distort accountabilities. Insulation, which is how AA currently uses micro management.

I'm talking about layers and insulation, too.

There are fewer layers today than there were with Bob, and there's a lot less insulation.

In 1997, it was unthinkable for an analyst to speak directly to a VP, much less a SVP. That wasn't the case in 1999.

How many VP's when Crandall was in office??

56 was Carty. The boom of the bloating!

Uh, no. 49 + 7 Sabre VP's was in 1997, Crandall's last year as Chairman. He retired in 1998.

Carty had 53 VP's in 2001, which was four more than Crandall. By comparison, United (who was far more bloated than AA historically) only had 40 in 2001...

Arpey currently has about the same number of VP's as Crandall did, especially if you adjust for the fact that Eagle was a fragment of what it is today, but AA also still had AMR Services, AMR Investments, etc. with their own VP's.

Bloating may be a perception, but again, look at airlines like WN and US: they have the same number of VPs as DL, UA and AA.

They don't have the same number of employees or airplanes, but still have the all the same issues and the same degree of regulation and complexity to manage (someone still needs to head up all the HR Finance, Sales, Airports, and Real Estate activities whether you have 250 airplanes and 50+ destinations or 700 airplanes and 200+ destinations.

---

Where you are absolutely correct is that there's a lot less accountability, but that's at every level, including the front line employees.

And there also seems to be a lack of desire to make some of the tough decisions. In 2003, there would have been no discussion about whether or not to go with the Vermont Plan. It would have just happened.

None of that (accountability or decisiveness) has to do with micromanagement, layers, or the number of VP's.

It has everything to do with the people in those roles... Arpey apparently prefers to avoid confrontation. I don't think that's not going to work anymore, unfortunately.

 

[Hopeful]

It has everything to do with the people in those roles... Arpey apparently prefers to avoid confrontation. I don't think that's not going to work anymore, unfortunately.

Oh, im sure Arpey will have nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo problem confronting a BK judge when he pleads his case for increasing executive compensation in these "oh so difficult times" so the key talent doesn't bail out on AA during the reorganization process.

 

[eolesen]

If management were a bunch of young guys hired from the outside, perhaps you'd have a point.

Fact is, most of the current VPs are career AA people, so if they haven't left yet, it's probably safe to say they're not just staying around for the buffet in the executive dining room...

 

[MCI transplant]

<_< ------- You've elevated Crandall to God status, but he's not!------- How old is he now anyway? Leave the ol' man enjoy his retirement for cryin out loud! He earned it! The Ol' bast#$%#!

 

[FWAAA]

If the internet had existed during Crandall's reign of terror, the postings about him would have made the postings about Arpey (over the past 8.5 years) look like love letters. People mistakenly remember Crandall as a god because the company was growing, wages were growing and the future looked bright. For the past eight plus years, the opposite has happened, and as a result, Arpey is thought of as the Devil. Rather predictably, given the vastly different economic realities during each man's reign of terror.

 

[Buck]

If the internet had existed during Crandall's reign of terror, the postings about him would have made the postings about Arpey (over the past 8.5 years) look like love letters. People mistakenly remember Crandall as a god because the company was growing, wages were growing and the future looked bright. For the past eight plus years, the opposite has happened, and as a result, Arpey is thought of as the Devil. Rather predictably, given the vastly different economic realities during each man's reign of terror.

I do not believe people looked at Crandall as a God, but they had some respect for him as a leader who made decesions good or bad, but he stuck with what he said.

 

[ULM148]

Buck, that's kind of where I'm at with Crandall. My career wasn't so smooth under his leadership. I personally thought he was ruthless, however, I did have respect for him because he held the reigns tightly on AA. He was a highly effective leader who didn't hesitate to make the tough decisions. Maybe guilty of being a control monger but that was his style. I still have a problem with the lack of leadership from Arpey, and the lack of direction he is displaying on a daily basis. AA needs someone to fix whats broke, so who? Is there anyone with the resume that can stop the train wreck? Any thoughts?

 

[tom barry]

Buck "nailed it" in his assessment of RLC ! (Buck's got a very good batting average in his long time on this site) !!

As was mentioned, Arpey would rather walk away from confrontation, while "Uncle BOBBY" would RUN full tilt towards it !

Crandall's New England Upbringing (Westerly/Providence RI.) had a whole lot to do with it. Up there, (when it became crunch time) you STEPPED on People,...Before You got Stepped On !
Period, case closed !

And YES, I think Crandall Could step in tomorrow, and steer the AA ship towards "fair winds"
(And that would include by PURE LUCK if needed) (I Never saw a guy with More Horse shoes up his ARSE) !!

 

[eolesen]

I think we need to bring NHBB out of retirement as CEO and dispense with the foolery once and for all.

 

[MCI transplant]

Buck, that's kind of where I'm at with Crandall. My career wasn't so smooth under his leadership. I personally thought he was ruthless, however, I did have respect for him because he held the reigns tightly on AA. He was a highly effective leader who didn't hesitate to make the tough decisions. Maybe guilty of being a control monger but that was his style. I still have a problem with the lack of leadership from Arpey, and the lack of direction he is displaying on a daily basis. AA needs someone to fix whats broke, so who? Is there anyone with the resume that can stop the train wreck? Any thoughts?

<_< ------- So let me get this stright. What your saying is that it's not a matter of "if", but, "when," that "train wreck" will happen? -------- That, my friend, is a major admission from someone from Management!------Sad! Sad!

 

[ULM148]

<_< ------- So let me get this stright. What your saying is that it's not a matter of "if", but, "when," that "train wreck" will happen? -------- That, my friend, is a major admission from someone from Management!------Sad! Sad!

It doesn't take a genius to see that AA has been operating for years without leadership. If we stay on course with the loss program and continue to operate without governance than "when" is probably more likely then "if". If you read what I've posted you will see that am advocating corporate change in leadership. The "admission from someone from management" statement is narrow minded. Depending on when you were hired and for what job, there were plenty of Union brothers and sister's effected under Crandall's reign. Again, as I stated before, "I had a career under Crandall's reign, I now have a job". I started this thread because we need leadership, and I would not like to see us go the way of so many others.

 

[777 fixer]

Yes in reference to Bob he gutted TWA with the purchase of TWA's London routes.

He did'nt gut anything, he just bought what was being offered up for sale. Blame Ichan instead.

 

[777 fixer]

Didn't he almost go to jail for talking to that guy from Braniff ?

No he did not. It only would have been a crime if the CEO of Braniff had agreed and they had implemented the price increases. It was nothing more than Bob Crandall putting his foot in his mouth.