Airport route development strategy planning and performance measurement with a dynamic performance management framework

Abstract

Route development programs have become popular with airports worldwide to enhance air connectivity. Enhanced air connectivity of an airport has been found to have a positive and significant impact on the competitiveness and attractiveness of the airport and the regional economy in which the airport is located. However, the drivers behind route development programs and their performance are not always clear; this has been less explored in the literature. In this paper, a dynamic performance management approach is taken to build a modeling framework in which key drivers affecting route development performance and strategic resources affecting key drivers are identified. Route-level planning is used in an empirical study to demonstrate the dynamic mechanism of airport route development initiatives and performance measurements. The proposed framework can not only provide performance monitoring, but also suggest suitable indicators to evaluate the performance for policymakers in future airport route development.

Prevention and Mitigation of Rural Higher Education Dropout in Colombia: A Dynamic Performance Management Approach.

“…Building on previous works such as Bivona and Cosenz, 49 Herrera et al, 50 , 51 Bivona, 52 Cosenz et al, 53 Bianchi et al, 54 Feng et al, 55 and Yin et al, 56 we developed a model in five phases. 57 The first phase involved identifying the strategic resources, performance drivers, and results and documenting the DPM Chart.…”

“…In this case, there is no strict requirement for a prior dynamic equilibrium since the focus is on exploring the dynamics and effects of policies in the system. Lastly, the limitation of data availability plays a role since establishing dynamic equilibrium requires historical data for all variables in the system, and the data obtained in the study by Guzmán et al [55] were cross-sectional rather than longitudinal." Comment 4: In the analysis of the simulation data, perhaps the time step is 2 instead of 20.…”