"COMMUNICATION AND REPORTING"

AVIATION AND FACILITIES MANAGEMENT THE AIRPORT

info@tafawuq.ae, www.tafawuq.ae

Stuart opened the fifth session stating that the group would finalise Mary’s remaining issues and close Q1, otherwise the six outstanding questions wouldn’t be interrogated sufficiently enough. He further stated that he expected the scrutinisers to complete Q1 in their own time during the next few days and upload into the group’s airport folder.

Ahmad decided to lead the discussion; his opening gambit challenged the group to identify four or five relevant bullet-points that expressed what a communication and reporting plan should detail. The scrutinisers expounded fifteen or more points, which after considerable reasoning were reduced to the following:

1. What information

2. Frequency of communication

3. Communication providers4. Communication channels

There then followed arguments for and against “what information” should be made available and to whom it should be presented. Stakeholders, specifically selected customer personnel were identified as those who were entitled; perhaps more than other recipients, to be aware of all aspects of Tafawuq’s service programmes, service delivery and service resource, and financial information, thereby receiving up-to-date information as and when it was obtainable, albeit the group did not reach 100% agreement. A second group were identified as the end uses, customer employees who relied heavily on the services Tafawuq provided. However, it was decided that a monthly report that depicts all service activities would be issued to the specifically selected customer personnel who in turn would elect who received “what information” and when.

Tarfwuq’s existing reporting structure was interrogated unearthing one or two failings, which the scrutinisers chose to rectify. The most important failing was that personnel operating in isolation failed to make connections and act on evidence of problems relevant to Tafawuq’s service delivery. Subsequently vital information failed to reach those who should be alert to the problems. Consequently the group devised a revised escalation reporting structure.

“Frequency of communication” was quickly interrogated and then put to bed with the participants agreeing that weekly, monthly, quarterly and annual reports detailing service activities would suffice.

Who should be the “communication providers” developed into a two-way debate between Ahmad and Valentina, eventually they agreed the following:

1. Who will be the Communicators?2. What are the Communications Goals and Objects? Expressly the Target Audience(s)?3. When and How Frequently to Plan to Communicate?4. What Resources Are Available for Communicating?

The result of the debate supported by the other participants laid the responsibility on Valentina and her marketing colleagues’ door-step. After all, as Ray expounded they are the company’s communicators. However, Stuart and Sam disagreed arguing that operational information by-passed marketing. Finally it was agreed that marketing would be the communication providers for newsworthy and unusual activities and operations would communicate the hard facts regarding operational responsibilities.