Reading the articles for this week, I could review the JetBlue's crisis in more ethical and professional view. Despite of the CEO’s responsible and sincere apology and promise toward the public, I found two critical points of the company’s reaction to the crisis. One was the professionalism, and the other one was the company’s ethics.
In professional aspect, I think the situation could have been less serious if the company prepared a systemic course of treatments for unexpected emergencies including bad weather . The news that reported about the detention of costumers for 11 hours and unreasonable cancellations and delays of airplanes don’t sound professional and thorough. In addition as the CEO mentioned in the media, the company had a problem of understaffed condition in emergency and having effective way to treat it during the crisis.
When it comes to the ethics, I would like to say that the company somewhat underestimated the value of ethics during the crisis but realized and pursued it in the end. As some analysts assess, the company’s low-cost marketing could dominate their decision. They might have been worried about making a huge financial loss in their business caused by the weather crisis, however, they are now spending much more money compensating the customers and reorganizing the company to recover the damaged company’s image. If the company valued the ethics and made a decision from the customer’s side, they could have avoid innumerous complaints of costumers which resulted in the plummeting company’s reputation. I think, however, the CEO’s taking-all-responsibilities behavior and ensuing efforts to prevent this kind of situation from occurring again, were a very effective and ethical way, which differentiated themselves from other irresponsible companies.
The readings for this week taught me how important the concise but effective way of communication is when we write a public document. Although I am not confident of writing in English, I will try to reach the precise and reasonable writing level as much as I can.
Comments
Ethics
I don’t necessary agree with your argument on Jet Blue’s ethics given the situation. With detailed knowledge of the situation because I studied it in a few other classes I don’t agree that Jet Blue was using cost cutting strategies. The problems they had all stemmed from the fact that they were trying to be the best airline and not delay flights when other companies did. This caused a back up that left them with to many planes and to little gates at many airports. This situation is when they realized they needed more people. They were not understaffed because of cost cutting, they were understaffed because they gambled and it backfired big time.
Gambling
I understand that the reason that this situation arose was because they were trying to help their customers in the best way and as you said "it backfired big time," but when is gambling a good decision, and when it is too much of a gamble. Companies should always take calculated risks, not shot in the dark risks. I feel that in such a situation, one where customers were to be effected greatly, the company should have choose a safer route. They should have made smart decisions about delaying flights and not gambled with their customer's time. JetBlue can not afford to loose the goodwill of their customers. And that's what they were gambling with here. The reason JetBlue is successful is because of the mass of people who follow JetBlue. It is almost a cult following. By gambling with customers' time, they are taking too big of a risk for the company.
Reading Response Comment
I agree with you that the situation may have been less serious had there been a previous system in place. However, the magnitude of the weather was unforeseeable and they would have still experienced problems. Many other more established airlines still experienced problems as well. I think the reason that JetBlue was so affected was not the fact that they lack an emergency plan, but rather was the result of their business structure. The majority of JetBlue’s flights are based out of the JFK airport and because of this they are automatically going to be affected more when the weather will not permit their aircrafts to leave. And being centralized at one airport they have less flexibility in shifting flights around like other airlines.
Cost policy
I am sorry but I don't agree with your argument on the company's low cost policy. I don't think that would have had less staff and people working due to low cost policy. The company had federal restrictions on the pilot working hours. Also if they were running on a low cost policy, then you are right, they are spending way more on compensating the passengers. So by looking at their actions, I don't think that they would be on a low cost. They would have not made the customer's Bill of Rights then. They wouldn’t try to apologize for what happened with the idea of not offering the same service later.