Only 18 months after taking the helm at the Federal Aviation Administration, Jane Garvey has already served as long as the entire terms of some of her predecessors. But even so, she admits that the unprecedented five-year term she has been granted is beginning to look limited. Time now seems short to implement the massive restructuring programme that the agency is under heavy pressure to deliver.
Garvey is a team builder and a pragmatist. She has acquired a reputation for using her keen management skills to focus sharply on core issues. But that reputation cut little ice in the nomination process leading to her confirmation as Administrator in July 1997. Sceptics were quick to point out that her portfolio was almost entirely devoid of any aviation experience and that she was the first non-pilot in the post. Indeed, at one confirmation hearing, a senator grilled Garvey on budget overruns at a Boston public authority where she was briefly a commissioner, even though the project has since been lauded by the usually critical US General Accounting Office (GAO).
But with a yawning, seven-month gap at the FAA since previous Administrator David Hinson stepped down, plus an almost embarrassing lack of candidates who were either suitable or willing to take on this high-profile post, the relief in Washington was tangible when Garvey's nomination was confirmed.
So Garvey now steers this massive and unwieldy ship. She has spent much of her time sifting through a sea of high priority tasks and attempting to put into some sort of order a list in which everything seems urgent. Threading through this challenge is the nagging question of how to address the reform of a government agency whose credibility was seriously undermined in the wake of the ValuJet crash in Miami in 1996. That crash exposed the unworkable conflict that existed in the FAA's dual mandate as both industry promoter and regulator.
Garvey acknowledges that the credibility issue remains and takes the view that getting the work done will, simultaneously, solve the problem. "It's an issue about public standing on two fronts," she says. "There is the perspective from outside and from within the agency as well. These are a couple of issues that we are trying very hard to address. But essentially, the best way to deal with the credibility issue is to tackle it within the three sections that we are working on - safety, security and efficiency of the system. We have a responsibility and an opportunity to lay out an agenda and to get it done."
However, Garvey remains respectful of the FAA's past achievements. "There should be a fundamental respect of the traditions that have given us our strong record of safety," she says. "What has gone before is wonderful and is built on a proud tradition, but we should always be asking ourselves whether there is a better way to do business. We change as individuals and we are constantly changing, so we must be like that as an organisation."
Focussed safety agendaBy her own admission, a focused agenda was almost non-existent at the FAA before she arrived. In safety, for instance, Garvey is fond of pointing out that when she arrived at the FAA she inherited more than 1,000 safety recommendations. Even when duplications were eliminated, there remained 450 proposals - a fact that Garvey said added up to an "unfocused agenda" which forced the agency to move from crisis to crisis in a way that only reinforced its reactive and unresponsive image.
But some progress has been made. In April, a safety agenda was launched that was based on the recommendations of the White House Commission on Aviation Safety and Security.
When it comes to untangling the confusion that previously existed over the FAA's role, Garvey now leaves no room for doubt on her position. "Safety is the number one priority," she says. "If you look at the government's 300 agencies, there are 32 that have a direct impact on people's lives and this is one of the most important. We are moving ahead on EGPWS (enhanced ground proximity warning systems). By the end of the year, we will meet with stakeholders and be walking through other initiatives and we will do an assessment of them. I am pleased with the progress. But you always question whether there is more that you can do."
Closely related to safety is system efficiency, an area where Garvey is adopting a theme she plans to extend across the FAA and to industry - it is the message that a consensus can reap dividends. "I guess if I have one over-riding message, one that I see as a common theme, it is that we will be most successful as an agency and an industry if we speak with one voice to Congress," she says.
Garvey, who previously worked at the Federal Highway Administration, could only look over her shoulder in envy this year as she saw her former agency treated generously in its funding requests by Congress. Congress, by contrast, treats the FAA with some suspicion when it hears differing answers about what is actually needed. The lesson to be learned, Garvey is convinced, is that the highways industry got its act together and presented a united front to Congress, which duly rewarded the effort. "Many elements of the community came together and spoke with one voice. They were prepared to put aside individual campaigns. We need to learn that lesson and do the same," notes Garvey.
So this year, Garvey has been leading an effort to get industry-wide support and commitment for a programme that would introduce free flight into the national aerospace system by 2002. Earlier signs for free flight were not promising. An attempt to put in place a technology demonstration programme all but fell apart when industry and the FAA disagreed over where to stage the demonstration and on which technologies to focus.
Consensus on free flightSuch public haggling explains why Garvey, who sees free flight as critical to improving system efficiency and avoiding gridlock, is stepping up the stakes and calling for a consensus on a new, step-by-step agenda that should get the programme moving again. "It's a very aggressive agenda. We have a programme office and we've pooled all our positions in that. We are asking industry to stay with us and stand with us, not to splinter off. We must speak with one voice. These are complicated and challenging issues and I don't think there is one entity that will solve them alone. Collaborative safety is a shared responsibility," says Garvey.
But the Administrator is aware that free flight will be of no use to the airlines unless they can also see direct financial benefits that accrue quickly enough to offset the necessary investment. "We need to understand how to measure the benefits as we move forward," she says. "Industry will play a major role as we move through free flight. We must be able to monitor whether we are getting the benefits we hope for. I was interested in how we could do this and so I looked at the results of collaborative decision-making at one of the major airlines. That programme has saved millions of dollars. Obviously, there may be potential savings that could be achieved in the same way in terms of moving aircraft through the air traffic system."
Although the sceptics remain, Garvey has already notched up a track record of turning round a potential public debacle. By late 1997, just as Garvey was getting accustomed to her new desk, it became obvious that the FAA was headed for some serious trouble over the year 2000 (Y2K) issue. A GAO report put it bluntly: the clock was ticking and the FAA would not be ready in time. In response, Garvey masterminded a Y2K programme that has won praise from most of the airlines.
This appears to have put the FAA on schedule so that validation of all systems should be completed by 31 March 1999. Garvey now plans to celebrate the new millennium by taking a flight on the evening of 31 December 1999, with Y2K programme manager Ray Long, that will cross all four continental time zones in the USA. With that personal goal in mind, it is perhaps not surprising that Garvey says: "In 1999, Y2K has to be the top priority and has got to be the number one issue."
Reforming the FAABut underpinning the success or failure of any collaborative efforts will be success in reforming the FAA. Increasingly, industry and government are calling for the FAA to behave more like a financially accountable corporation. When the US major airlines launched a massive lobbying campaign to get rid of the flat-rate ticket tax and replace it with a user fee, their efforts were partly undermined by the fact that the FAA has no system for determining how much it costs to provide its air traffic services. Opponents of user fees complained that charges could not be set fairly unless costs were known.
Costs are just one of three areas in which the FAA is trying to improve the way it does business - the others are acquisition and personnel. Garvey says the agency is at various stages in each one of these efforts. "Acquisition is the furthest along. George Donohue (the former research and acquisitions administrator) did a wonderful job in making this a hallmark of our research efforts. We have managed to shorten by 50-60%, the process time on contracts. But we still need to evaluate whether we are saving money in that process. There is no full accounting process yet. But we are getting inquiries from other parts of government about what we have achieved," she says adding that it will be extended with Free Flight Phase 1.
"We have also been able to shorten some of the time it takes to hire staff. A pilot programme is going on now that involves about 1,200 employees and in which we take a look at moving away from automatic staff raises and towards pay bands that reward people on performance. This is an extraordinarily difficult change. The government has always worked on the basis of set pay structures, so the culture shift we are asking people to take on is enormous. But the pilot programme will give opportunities to stop and listen and learn. The first assessment will be in December. It's a very challenging process because it's a very different way to approach salaries. But we want to reward good staff."
Some progress is also being made on introducing a cost accounting system, says Garvey. "Everyone makes the point to us that we need to understand what our costs are. It's useful as a management tool. Early data shows that some areas are costing more than others. We are making good progress in identifying that and trying to understand it. We have focused on ATC, and by the end of the year, we will put that structure in place to understand those cost elements more fully. We are starting with ATC because that's a service we provide to the airlines. We are looking at taking it through the whole FAA, but we will start with ATC."
In keeping with her theme of collaboration, Garvey is turning to industry for help in this particular process. "We held an industry day. Airlines told us about their experiences and their cost accounting processes. It was very helpful. A small team created of some individual folks, and people with cost accounting experience, was put together to develop some performance measurements," says Garvey.
Funding of the FAA is another vexing question that Garvey expects to be scrutinised on the Hill and in Congress during 1999. "The idea of a performance-based organisation is very new and is something that will get a lot of attention," she says. One year ago, a report by the National Civil Aviation Review Commission made a number of specific recommendations on funding reform that Garvey clearly embraces and wants to see put in place. "Without a stable funding source, the FAA's ATC system will continue to live hand-to-mouth," she says. "And without management reform, the FAA could remain disconnected from its customers' needs."
User fees would facilitate one step in the direction towards a stable, predictable funding source. Privatisation of the ATC system might be another step. But while Garvey has an eye on what other agencies around the world have achieved in their privatisation efforts, it seems clear she will not follow suit until there is a consensus.
"We put forward a full privatisation proposal two years ago and there was no interest from Congress, so we have modified our approach," explains Garvey. "I think there are still lessons to be learned, but again, you need to pull in the stakeholders so you are doing it all together. With some of the privatisation efforts going on around the world it is still too early in the process to know whether they are a success."
A consensus may not be achievable, however, on the thorny issue of international overflight fees. When the FAA tried to impose these last year, in keeping with the practices of some other agencies, it met with wrath from civil aviation authorities worldwide, US politicians and even the US Court of Appeals. There were accusations that the fees were unlawful, imposed without prior consultation, and not cost-based. Garvey is making no promises that the ultimate solution will be palatable. "There will be differences and the overflight fees issue is where we still need to find a common goal. But that goal may not be wildly embraced by others," she warns.
None of Garvey's tasks have easy solutions. Which is the most difficult to address? Garvey barely hesitates. "One of the most challenging questions at the FAA is what we will stop doing?,'" she says. The Administrator has less than four years to work that one out. For now, there is one truth of which she can be certain. "1999 will be an extraordinarily busy year in aviation," she says.
Source: Airline Business
