Asiana’s the Best! But I live in Sweden. Behind the Skytrax quality survey
Recently Skytrax, the public face of the UK's Inflight Research Services group, held its annual awards ceremony in Hamburg. Its website, www.airlinequality.com, provides an open forum for travelers worldwide to report on airlines and airports, based on their personal experience with various providers.
Lots of parameters
Plus, each year it solicits additional input used in the annual carrier survey.
Divided into various subcategories, the group solicits travelers' assessments of airlines as a group and by region; by class, catering, seat comfort and lounge amenities. Service categories also provide an opportunity for passengers to evaluate the staff with whom they interact. There are also separate categories for legacy and low cost carriers, which rate the business models differently.
Finally, using all of this information, Skytrax has established criteria that allow it to assign star rankings on a scale of 1 to 5. These categories derive from the aggregation of passenger reports and are based primarily on the alignment of promise and performance.
Skytrax's CEO, Edward Plaisted, offers the following explanation of the criteria involved, "the greatest attribute behind 5-Star status is an airline's ability to deliver the combination of Product and Service. A great product standard is not by itself the key to a 5-Star ranking, since we are equally concerned by the Quality of front-line service that an airline provides."
Some big factors omitted
Interestingly, the group excludes commercial concerns such as fares, schedules and reward programs from its process, instead being completely focused on the "'delivered' frontline Product and Service". The site also applies what it defines as an "international style" approach that diminishes differences between regional passenger perceptions and expectations, thus conceptually at least, creating a more level playing field.
But it's still subjective
Yet while criteria are set for the various categories, the responses are subjective, based on the individual traveler's perceptions and thus easily affected by mood, preconceptions or previous experience. A poor report may often have more to do with a long security line than with the actual flight experience, the hassle having predisposed the passenger to a critical mode.
Nonetheless, by reading a representative sample of the reviews one can often get a general overview of the carrier or airport involved, which is often a fair representation of the average experience that might be encountered.
What this means in the grand scheme of things is that the overall, rather than individual content is perhaps more valuable. For instance, over time Cathay Pacific and Singapore Airlines have regularly traded back and forth for the top global positions. It is doubtful that the average traveler would be cognizant of the subtle differences that are a part of that jockeying for position.
But the results do provide customers with aggregated perceptions of quality that reflect clear differences between providers. However, by eliminating the commercial factors -especially rewards - the results may not be reflective of the most prominent parameters of customer choice. Corporate negotiators, for instance, are often far more focused on price than a quality score.
Who's ranked where and when?
The first table shows the rankings for Airline of the Year since 2001. The presence of Cathay and Singapore is fairly ubiquitous across the decade. Emirates began with a splash, but has lost some of its shine in recent years, according to the survey. In 2006, British appeared in the top position and then once again disappeared and Qantas has flirted with greatness yet recently dropped out of the top tier.
Year |
1st |
2nd |
3rd |
---|---|---|---|
2001 |
|||
2002 |
|||
2003 |
|||
2004 |
|||
2005 |
|||
2006 |
British |
||
2007 |
Thai |
||
2008 |
|||
2009 |
And for 2010?
All that being said, the results provide an interesting window from which to view broader trends and changes. As one example, the traditionally strong Asian brands are being increasingly challenged by the Gulf carriers; with Emirates, Etihad and now Qatar, nudging into the top rankings. And, fair or not, the US carriers remain totally absent from any global categories outside of North America.
The table below shows a sampling of the results, with the full listing, along with details of the methodology, available at the airlinequality website.
There are some surprises as well as some categories that allow a far better chance for airlines to score better; in three of the low-cost categories the winning airline was the only entrant. And while few may have had the opportunity to fly Air Astana, its limited rivals in Eastern Europe make it a candidate for excellence despite its performance vis-à-vis the top players.
There is also the matter of size. Some carriers, because they are globally known and ranked have the opportunity to garner more results. However, that theory has limits as the world's largest carriers, with the most passengers, are represented only once, by Delta.
Asian carriers dominate
Nonetheless, of the first 39 available spaces (first 13 lines) it is clear that the Asian carriers (in bold) dominate, followed by the emerging mob in the Gulf (italicized). In those first 13 categories, with 39 placement spots, and open to all carriers worldwide, only 4 positions are occupied by carriers outside those two regions. And with a record 7 spots in those categories, Singapore obviously continues to do something right.
As promised, the US carriers, long dominant in the global market, fare poorly and none of the large network carriers makes it into the last category, which ranks staff service in the region; those positions being occupied by two low-cost carriers and the smallest of the US majors.
Category |
1st |
2nd |
3rd |
---|---|---|---|
Airline of the Year |
|||
Best Low-cost |
|||
Best Regional |
Bangkok Air
|
||
Most Improved |
Hainan |
||
Inflight Entertainment |
|||
Best Cabin Staff |
|||
Best Airport Services |
Thai (BKK) |
Asiana (ICN) |
ANA (NRT) |
Best First Class |
|||
Best Business Class |
|||
Best Economy Class |
|||
Best F Catering |
|||
Best C Catering |
|||
Best Y Catering |
Turkish |
||
Best Transatlantic |
British |
||
Best Transpacific |
|||
Best Alliance |
Star |
||
Best African |
S. African |
||
Best Asian |
|||
Best Austrailasia |
Air NZ |
||
Best Chinese |
Hainan |
||
Best South East Asia |
Thai |
||
Best Central Asia/India |
Jet |
||
Best Mid East |
|||
Best Central/Caribbean |
|||
Best South American |
LAN |
||
Best North American |
|||
Best Europe |
Turkish |
||
Best Europe South |
Turkish |
Aegean |
|
Best Europe North |
|||
Best Europe West |
British |
||
Best Europe East |
Czech |
||
Low-cost Asia |
|||
Low-cost Africa |
|||
Low-cost Australasia |
|||
Low-cost Europe |
EasyJet |
||
Low-cost Central Asia/India |
Indigo |
||
Low-cost Mid East |
|||
Low-cost North America |
|||
Low-cost South America |
|||
Staff Service N. America |
Alaska |
Helpful tidbits and interesting results
Some of this information is useful to travelers, especially those traveling to or within regions where the carrier's names may be unfamiliar. For instance, if you are a foodie traveling in economy, it is nice to know that Turkish is likely to bring joy to your palate.
However, despite its high marks for improvement, only a small fraction of the world's travelers will have occasion to board a Garuda aircraft. And while oneworld may be ranked as the best alliance, that outcome will have little practical value for the holder of a United 1K status or a frequent traveler living in Atlanta where Delta, and hence SkyTeam, rules. There is also the fact that of the 15 lines devoted to "best" in each region, comprising 45 placements, oneworld and Skyteam carriers combined appear less often than either Star or those remaining unaligned.
Alliance Shares |
||
---|---|---|
Star |
19 |
42% |
Unaligned |
15 |
33% |
7 |
16% |
|
Skyteam |
4 |
9% |
So, as with many other polls and surveys, the results can provide fodder for thought but have little effect on the reality of one's choices. One's location and type of travel are often the dominant factors. Cost and schedule, which regularly rank as the top two factors that influence carrier choice, are, as noted, omitted from the Skytrax parameters.
Being #1 may bring limited benefits
Therefore the power and influence of quality service is significantly tempered by a great many factors that may combine to make a carrier's reputation a non-consideration for many, if not most, of the world's consumers. Occasional travelers in Ohio or Cairo may read of top-ranked carriers but never have the opportunity to experience them.
However, the ratings do indicate that a flight on SIA or Etihad might just make one's most convenient and available airline pale by comparison, making it all the more difficult for the local carrier to get a glowing evaluation.