BAA BA black sheep: Heathrow T5 went wrong because it believed its own "buzzwords"

Alistair Cooke is a hard act to follow. But Clive James fills his "Letter from America" slot on BBC Radio 4 on Sunday mornings brilliantly. He was in spectacular form on 6 April delivering this demolition of Heathrow Terminal Five, BAA and BA. (This is a text version).

Veronica Kumar, the 29-year-old 'head of people and change' at T5, was the target of James' ridicule, although he was kind enough not to name her. "Our policy has been to create the context for change, then apply changes within that context," she said in what maybe the apotheosis of Buzzword Bingo. Said James of Kumar's management-speak: "Since that could mean anything it probably means something."

James' great talent is for taking the mick, as anyone who saw any of his Clive James on TV series can testify. But he is more than a gagmeister. On this occasion, as with many others, he leads his audience to appreciate the real damage that can be done by waffle. The problems of Heathrow, surely, came about because managers had their feet no where near the ground. Being airborne in this way, even when running airports, is dangerous.

Lots has been said of the saga (Jamie Doward's scrutiny in The Observer of a couple of weeks ago was better than most) but the key mistake was arrogance. Even if BA and BAA were 100 per cent confident that everything would work smoothly, they should have opened in stages. By going for the big bang, they were asking for trouble. And that trouble is not going away: as I write flights are still being cancelled and T5 has to deny an allegation that nine out of ten missing bags are permanently lost. This must be nonsense. But Heathrow's biggest problem is that it is all too believable.

James described the guff quite kindly, as "high flown abstract poetry." Players of Buzzword Bingo will win big with "context for change" if they ever hear it again. Organisations that even think in such farcical terms are losers.

Comments

[Justin]

"Even if BA and BAA were confident that the terminal would open smoothly were 100 per cent certain, they should have opened in stages. By going for the big bang, they simply asked for trouble."

You hit the nail on the head. The day the news broke I sat my staff down as a training exercise and asked them what they think went wrong. Every single person said the same thing, "Why did they do it all at once?!?!?"

New conveyor system, new computer system, new everything and they expected that a familiarization course for the employees would make it all work out just fine. You can almost hear the pointy-haired bosses at the top, "We want a list of all unexpected problems before they happen so that they won't happen." The BA execs are getting what they deserve.

[Jo]

What delicious irony! Tell me as nouveaux-pomme, what will happen to me if I 'do'? Or if as German might say "I function"?

[Katie John]

They probably didn't leverage the synergies between the different workers or run the plans up the flagpole and see who saluted.