A content analysis of international airline alliances mission statements

Seo, Gang-Hoon Article A content analysis of international airline alliances mission statements Business Systems Research (BSR) Provided in Cooperation with: IRENET - Society for Advancing Innovation and Research in Economy, Zagreb Suggested Citation: Seo, Gang-Hoon (2020) : A content analysis of international airline alliances mission statements, Business Systems Research (BSR), ISSN 1847-9375, Sciendo, Warsaw, Vol. 11, Iss. 1, pp. 89-105, https://doi.org/10.2478/bsrj-2020-0007 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/318719 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ 89 Business Systems Research | Vol. 11 No. 1 |2020 A Content Analysis of International Airline Alliances Mission Statements Gang-Hoon Seo Graduate School of Business Administration, Kobe University, Kobe, Japan Abstract Background: Mission statements have come to play an important role as tools for organizational value sharing. Objectives: This study aims to shed light on what types of values are highlighted in international airline alliance members’ mission statements, and whether there are significant differences or not. Methods/Approach: Quantitative content analyses have been conducted with the goal to investigate mission statements of 61 members of international airline alliances: Star Alliance, SkyTeam, and oneworld. Results: Frequency test outcomes reveal that “philosophy”, “selfconcept” and “location” are the predominant components in oneworld, “philosophy” is the primary component in SkyTeam, and “philosophy” and “customer” are the focal components of Star Alliance. According to chi-square tests, Star Alliance members emphasize “customer” more often than others do, and oneworld members highlight “profitability” more often. One-way Anova tests with a post hoc analysis reveal that Star Alliance members cover more components than SkyTeam. Conclusions: The theoretical implication of these findings is that they reveal the existence of unique values among international airline alliances members offering a competitive advantage. As a practical implication, these findings will be helpful for international airline alliances and airline managers for comparative purposes. Keywords: international airline alliance, airline, mission statement, organizational value, content analysis JEL main category: M JEL classification: F23, M1, M16, Paper type: Research article Received: Jul 17, 2019 Accepted: Sep 6, 2019 Citation: Seo, G-H. (2020), “A Content Analysis of International Airline Alliances Mission Statements”, Business Systems Research, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 89-105. DOI: 10.2478/bsrj-2020-0007 Acknowledgments: Editor-in-Cheif Professor Mirjana Pejić Bach, the anonymous reviewers, Professor Munehiko Itoh, and Professor Alan Jackson provided valuable comments, which contributed to the quality of the paper, while Ms. Zhonghui Li and Ms. Yushan Xie assisted in coding for this study. 90 Business Systems Research | Vol. 11 No. 1 |2020 Introduction In recent years, as a result of radical environmental changes surrounding the airline industry, for example, global economic recession and skyrocketing oil prices, deregulation, the privatization and commercialization of airline service, the global market penetration of new international airlines, etc., competition among airlines has intensified (Lin et al., 2018; Min et al., 2016). For these reasons, airlines are required to be competent enough to appeal to customers regarding their own merits (Lin et al., 2018; Lin et al., 2016), and they form international alliances and affiliate with alliances (Min et al., 2016). There exist many cases of failure of airline alliances and it has been pointed out that instability is in the nature of these alliances. Yet, in the airline industry, the influence of alliances has increasingly been extended (Morrish et al., 2002). Button et al. (1998) suggested that in the future, an airline that failed to be a member of an alliance would be isolated and encounter strategic disadvantages. Therefore, it is expected that the number of airlines participating in alliances will continue to increase (Evans, 2001). In fact, the members of Star Alliance, the biggest international airline alliance, have increased from eight airlines in 1998 to twenty-eight airlines in 2018. Currently, not only competition among airlines but also competition among alliances has intensified. International airline alliances have implemented the expansion of route networks, integrating the loyalty programs of members to maintain competitive advantages (Min et al., 2016). In addition, they are enhancing efficiency and productivity by sharing airport lounge facilities and Computer Reservation Systems (CRS) among members. In addition, enhancing the overall brand value and organizational value sharing among members are available strategic options for ensuring competitive advantages (Min et al., 2016). For instance, an alliance itself plays a role as an “umbrella brand” and each member becomes a “sub-brand” (Evans, 2001). In this manner, the brand management at the overall alliance level is crucial for international airline alliances because, when customers use an airline, the service of the airline is connected with that of other partner airlines, and customers experience the whole alliance’s service. Weber et al. (2004) argued that when an airline leaves a bad image with customers, it badly affects the whole alliance. Meanwhile, service standardization between members and value sharing are also critical challenges for international airline alliances. For example, alliances set service standards so that airlines can provide similar service and maintain service quality (Min et al., 2016; Evans, 2001). There has been an extensive discussion about the operational efficiency, productivity and financial performance of international airline alliances (Min et al., 2016; Tiernan et al., 2008; Oum et al., 2004; Kleymann et al., 2001). However, little attention has been given to what types of values are emphasized among alliance members. Corporate mission statements are significant in value sharing among alliance members as they imply particular types of values. In addition, a mission statement can be a hint when airlines and alliances choose optimal strategic partners. Mission statements include important information about airlines’ main services, strengths, relative similarities and differences (Kemp et al., 2003). In mission statements, airlines’ cultures and core values are reflected. Whether the culture and values of an airline fits one’s own company or not is a significant standard when choosing alliance partners (Medcof, 1997; Brouthers et al., 1995). However, regardless of its importance, it has been pointed out that very few studies have attempted to investigate the situation of mission statements in the airline industry (Law et al., 2018; Lin et al., 2018; Kemp et al., 2003). The main purpose of this study is to clarify what kind of values are highlighted in international airline alliance mission statements. Hence, this study focuses on the 91 Business Systems Research | Vol. 11 No. 1 |2020 content analysis of 61 mission statements of three major international airline alliance member airlines. This paper consists of five sections. The next section will focus on existing studies of international airline alliances and mission statements in the airline industry. In section three, content analyses including frequency tests, chi-square tests, and one-way Anova tests with post hoc analysis relevant to the mission statements of 61 airlines will be conducted. In section four, based on results, theoretical discussions are carried out. In section five, implications and limitations are described. International Airline Alliances The strategic alliance is “a particular and horizontal form of inter-organizational relationship in which two or more organizations collaborate, without the formation of a separate independent organization, to achieve one or more common strategic objectives” (Evans, 2001, p. 229). Traditionally, strategic alliances have been recognized as penetrations by multinational firms in inaccessible markets. Recently, as a strategic option, alliances have been highlighted (Evans, 2001). Strategic alliances are often seen in the pharmaceutical industry, the automobile industry, and the chemical industry. In addition, in the international airline industry, strategic alliances have been formed frequently (Evans, 2001). The phrase “airline alliance” indicates a strategic alliance of airlines. This is defined as “any collaborative arrangement between two or more carriers involving joint operations with the declared intention of improving competitiveness and thereby enhancing overall performance” (Morrish et al., 2002, p. 401). Regarding the scope of collaboration in international airline alliances, simple level cooperation, such as transfer of passenger and baggage handling service, was implemented at an early stage. Recently, such relationships have evolved to include company-wide marketing collaboration and technological cooperation. Great attention has been paid to the advantages and disadvantages of international airline alliances. Advantages of alliances can be classified into two categories: (i) advantages for airlines, and (ii) advantages for passengers. Dyer et al. (2001) pointed out that, through an alliance, an airline can promptly acquire the complementary assets of other airlines. Moreover, the improvement of seat capacity and revenue has often been discussed (Wright et al., 2010; Kleymann et al., 2001; Park, 1997; Hannegan et al., 1995). Also, market penetration and the maintenance of market status, as well as ensuring a stable market and cost-saving, are other merits of alliances (Button et al., 1998). Finally, through an alliance, organizational values are shared among members and brand values are elevated (Min et al., 2016). As merits for passengers, it is reported that passengers can use better services as airlines’ destinations are increased and passengers’ transfer times are shortened (Kleymann et al., 2001). One-stop check-in service, better baggage handling service, and the use of a common lounge are also beneficial for passengers (Evans, 2001; Dennis, 2000). On the other hand, Min et al. (2016) argued that there is no apparent evidence of improvements in operational effectiveness and performance through alliances. In addition, it has been reported that each airline’s brand value has declined, flight schedules have become more complex, and operational flexibilities have disappeared, while the higher the degree of cooperation with collaborating, the higher the risk and fixed cost (Kleymann et al., 2001). Regarding demerits for passengers, the number of flight destinations shrinks as alliances monopolize flight routes. In other words, it would seem that participating in an alliance does not always guarantee airlines’ strategic advantages. 92 Business Systems Research | Vol. 11 No. 1 |2020 Evans (2001) suggested five criteria for selecting strategic partners when airlines form alliances and participate in them (Medcof, 1997; Brouthers et al., 1995). The first one is the competence of partners. This means that partners are decided according to financial stability and market status. The second one is the degree to which the partners share the same level of risk. The third one is whether an alliance is well controlled and its operational effectiveness is sufficiently maintained. The fourth criterion is geographic fitness. Generally, there is a tendency to avoid alliances of airlines with overlapping markets. The last criterion is the compatibility of relevant organizational culture and operations (Medcof, 1997). Several comparative studies have been conducted on the effectiveness, productivity, and revenues of international airline alliances. Kleymann et al. (2001) suggested that the degree of risk and the revenue of airlines differs depending on their integration level. Oum et al. (2004) reported that horizontal alliances affect the airlines’ productivity, and that, in horizontal alliances, the higher the level of cooperation, the higher the productivity and profitability. Tiernan et al. (2008) compared alliances’ service quality performance regarding on-time arrivals, baggage reports, and flight cancellations. Finally, Min et al. (2016) compared the operational effectiveness and performance between alliance members and non-members. As a result, SkyTeam members and oneworld members’ revenues were found to be better than with Star Alliance. Table 1 indicates comparative airline alliance studies. Table 1 Comparative airline alliance studies Author Number of alliances and airlines Criteria for evaluation Kleymann et al., 2001 3 alliances, 15 airlines Degree of risk and revenue Oum et al., 2004 22 airlines Productivity and profitability Tiernan et al., 2008 4 alliances, 24 airlines On-time arrivals, baggage reports, flight cancellations Min et al., 2016 3 alliances, 59 airlines Operational effectiveness, financial performance Source: Kleymann et al. (2001), Oum et al. (2004), Tiernan et al. (2008), Min et al. (2016) However, very few studies have been done to analyze differences in alliance members’ values as competitive advantages. In the next section, corporate mission statement issues in the airline industry will be discussed. Mission statements in the airline industry Mission statements are firms’ messages and promises to stakeholders (Bartkus et al., 2004). Mission statements are answers to questions as to how companies should be in the future (Wang et al., 2011). In mission statements, companies’ strategic directions and goals are reflected (David, 2001). Several studies perceived that “vision”, “value”, “faith”, “principle”, “strategy” and “philosophy” are similar to “mission” (e.g., Castro et al., 2014; Ireland et al., 1992; and Pearce et al., 1987). It has often been said that mission statements play a significant role in relationship management with stakeholders. “A well-designed mission statement is essential for formulating, implementing and evaluating strategy” (Kemp et al., 2003, p. 635). Wang et al. (2011) argued that a mission statement is an indispensable factor of corporate management as it is an effective strategic tool. Through mission statements, companies attempt to achieve market differentiation (Lin et al., 2018; Kemp et al., 2003). A mission statement is a core factor of organizational culture (Klemme et al., 93 Business Systems Research | Vol. 11 No. 1 |2020 1991) and, as the ‘cultural glue’; it engages an organization’s members (Kemp et al., 2003). A mission statement is an important communication tool between a company’s inside and outside stakeholders such as employees, customers, investors, suppliers, the public, communities and the media (Law et al., 2018; Lin et al., 2018; Lin et al., 2016; Bartkus et al., 2004; Kemp et al., 2003). It has been reported that a well-designed mission statement positively influences employee and customer satisfaction (David et al., 2014; Jyoti et al., 2012). That is, a mission statement gives employees a sense of belonging (Lin, 2012), and produces emotional bonds and a sense of mission (Campbell et al., 1991). A clear mission statement confirms organizational values and strategic priorities (Kemp et al., 2003). In terms of the advantages of mission statements, it has been reported that they can ensure a company’s competitive advantage and improvements in brand value. Additionally, several studies have argued for a correlation between good mission statements and companies’ financial performance (Williams et al., 2014; Desmidt et al., 2011; Pearce et al., 1987). Lin et al. (2016) claimed that airlines’ mission statements positively affect passengers’ brand trust and brand equity. David (2007) suggested nine components of corporate mission statements, i.e., “customers”, “products”, “location”, “technology”, “concern for survival”, “philosophy”, “self-concept”, “concern for public image” and “concern for employees”. Lin et al. (2018), in addition to this, suggested “safety” as a new component, considering that it is emphasized more than other values in the airline industry. Mission statement studies in the airline industry can be classified into two categories: (i) content analyses of mission statements, and (ii) influence of mission statements on passengers. Table 2 summarizes mission statement studies in the airline industry. Table 2 Mission statement studies in the airline industry Author Data Methodology Purpose Kemp et al., 2003 50 airline mission statements Content analysis To investigate ideal elements of mission statements Castro et al., 2014 91 airport vision statements Content analysis To clarify types of international airports Lin et al., 2016 518 passenger questionnaires Questionnaire survey To examine associations between mission statements and passengers’ perceived brand trust and equity Law et al., 2018 200 airline mission statements Content analysis, Network analysis To identify dimensions and core values of mission statements in the airline industry Lin et al., 2018 79 airline mission statements Content analysis To examine the current trend of mission statements Source: Kemp et al. (2003), Castro et al. (2014), Lin et al. (2016), Law et al. (2018), Lin et al. (2018) Kemp et al. (2003) analyzed 50 airline mission statements and clarified the ideal elements of mission statements. Castro et al. (2014) analyzed 91 international airport vision statements and found that international airports can be categorized according to “geographic location”, “passenger movement” and “airport governance models”. In addition, they suggest “tourism” as a new component. Lin et al. (2018) analyzed 79 airline mission statements compared with Kemp et al. (2003). Law et al. (2018) 94 Business Systems Research | Vol. 11 No. 1 |2020 analyzed 200 airline mission statements and suggested 6 mission statement themes; “service”, “customer”, “concern for stakeholders”, “concern for strategy”, “competitive advantage” and “development”. Finally, Lin et al. (2016) conducted questionnaire surveys with 518 passengers in Taiwan to clarify mission statements’ influence on passengers. In spite of their importance, it has been pointed out that mission statement studies on the airline industry are limited (Law et al., 2018; Lin et al., 2018; Kemp et al., 2003). Also, little research has been done on alliance members’ distinctive value sharing through mission statements. Stakeholders in airline industry mission statements Stakeholders include inside and outside groups involved in a company’s profit. David (2001) argued that a company should cover all stakeholders widely in its mission statement. It has often been pointed out that a mission statement is a communication tool between a company and its outside stakeholders (Law et al., 2018; Lin et al., 2016; Bartkus et al., 2004). Airline business success depends on how well an airline manages relationships with its international and heterogeneous partners. Therefore, concern for an airline’s outside stakeholders can be crucial content in airline industry mission statements. However, concern for outside stakeholders has not received much attention in airline industry mission statement studies. For this reason, this study attempts to suggest “partners” as a new component and will explore its potential. Methodology Research questions and content analysis Based on these previous discussions, this study set four research questions as follows: o RQ1: What kind of values are highlighted in alliance members’ mission statements according to the alliance? o RQ2: Are there any significant differences in mission statement contents among alliance members? o RQ3: Are there any significant differences in mission statement component numbers among alliance members? Krippendorff (2004) states that content analysis is a research technique for making replicable and valid inferences from textual data. According to Lin et al. (2018), content analysis has been used in many business management research studies including corporate mission management. Through cross-organizational content analyses, organizations’ values can be clarified. Hsieh et al. (2005) claimed that a content analysis should be conducted relative to previous theoretical frameworks. By adopting a deductive measurement, in addition to previous studies, a new theoretical framework can be suggested. This study adopts a deductive measurement because components of mission statements in the airline industry have been established through several studies. Specifically, the author adopts a content analysis research framework including the frequency tests, chi-square tests implemented by Levy et al. (2013). Data is collected, qualitative and quantitative analyses are carried out, and finally, based on the results, theoretical discussions are conducted. Table 3 summarizes the research design in this study. In this study, “values” indicate alliances’ and airlines’ enduring beliefs (Brenda, 2000). “Components” are defined as elements of the alliance members’ mission statements. This study assumes that by analyzing the “components” we can get insights related to the “values” of alliances. 95 Business Systems Research | Vol. 11 No. 1 |2020 Table 3 Research design Research steps Purpose Data collection Collecting 61 mission statements of the members of three major international airline alliances Coding Extracting mission statement components of each international airline alliance member Frequency test Counting emphasized components in mission statements Chi-square test Finding differences among three international airline alliances One-way Anova test Examining differences in component numbers Source: Author’s work Sample and data collection The sample consists of the mission statements of 61 airlines participating in Star Alliance, SkyTeam, and oneworld, the three major international airline alliances. The market share of the three international airline alliances is almost 60% of the whole based on revenue, passengers and flight distance (Statista, 2017). Table 4 and Table 5 show profiles of three leading international airline alliances and their 61 partners. Table 4 Three leading international airline alliances Star Alliance SkyTeam oneworld Members 28 20 13 Destinations 1,317 1,074 1,012 Countries 193 177 158 Daily departures 18,800 17,343 12,738 Annual passengers (millions) 725＋ 730＋ 527.9＋ Market share 23.5 % 19.2% 16.4% Launch date 1997 2000 1998 Headquarters Frankfurt Amsterdam New York Revenue（US $） $194 billion $156 billion $132 billion Sources: Statista (2017), oneworld (2018), SkyTeam (2018), Star Alliance (2018), Seo (2019) The author attempted to collect all 61 major alliance members’ mission statements from their official websites from December 2nd to December 31st, 2018. Among them, AIR CANADA, Air Europa, and Lufthansa did not disclose official mission statements. However, the author contacted related staff directly via Facebook messenger or email and succeeded in collecting all 61 mission statements. 96 Business Systems Research | Vol. 11 No. 1 |2020 Table 5 Arlines analyzed in this study (n=61) Star Alliance (28) SkyTeam (20) oneworld (13) ADRIA Airways EGYPTAIR Aeroflot Delta Air Lines American Airlines AEGIAN Airlines Ethiopian Aerolíneas Argentinas Garuda Indonesia British Airways AIR CANADA EVA AIR Aeroméxico KLM Cathay Pacific AIR CHINA LOT POLISH AIRLINES Air Europa Kenya Airways Finnair AIR INDIA Lufthansa Air France Korean Air Iberia AIR NEW ZEALAND SAS (Scandinavian Airlines) Alitalia Middle East Airlines Japan Airlines ANA (All Nippon Airways) Shenzhen Airlines China Airlines Saudia LATAM ASIANA AIRLINES SINGAPORE AIRLINES China Eastern Airlines TAROM Malaysia Airlines Austrian Airlines SOUTH AFRICAN AIRWAYS China Southern Airlines Vietnam Airlines Qantas Avianca Brasil Swiss International Air Lines Czech Airlines XiamenAir Qatar Airways Avianca TAP AIR PORTUGAL Royal Jordanian Brussels Airlines THAI Airways SriLankan Airlines CopaAirlines TURKISH AIRLINES S7 Airlines Croatia Airlines UNITED Airlines Source: oneworld (2018), SkyTeam (2018), Star Alliance (2018) Coding This study adopted 10 components and definitions from previous studies (Lin et al., 2018; David, 2007; Kemp et al., 2003; Pearce et al., 1987) In addition, based on the discussions in section 2, a new component “partners” is suggested. Table 6 shows the components of the mission statements and their definitions. Table 6 Components of corporate mission statements Component Definition Customer The main target customer layers of airlines and alliances Product The principle products or services provided by airlines and alliances Location The geographic domains, competing areas or main competing markets of airlines and alliances Technology Airlines and alliances’ concern about technology Profitability Airlines and alliances’ commitment to financial success, growth, and profitability Philosophy The unique identities and personalities of airlines and alliances Self-concept The competitive advantages and selling points of airlines and alliances Public image The desired public images, and concern for community, social issues and environmental issues of airlines and alliances Employees The commitment to employees of airlines and alliances Safety The emphasis on safety of airlines and alliances Partners The concern for outside stakeholders of airlines and alliances including all partners and investors, etc. 103 Business Systems Research | Vol. 11 No. 1 |2020 30. Lin, Y. H., Ryan, C., Wise, N., Low, L. W. (2018), “A content analysis of airline mission statements: Changing trends and contemporary components”, Tourism Management Perspectives, Vol. 28, pp. 156-165. 31. Medcof, J. W. (1997), “Why too many alliances end in divorce”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 30 No.5, pp. 718-732. 32. Min, H., Joo, S. J. (2016), “A comparative performance analysis of airline strategic alliances using data envelopment analysis”, Journal of Air Transport Management, Vol. 52, pp. 99110. 33. Morrish, S. C., Hamilton, R. T. (2002), “Airline alliances—who benefits? ” Journal of Air Transport Management, Vol. 8 No.6, pp. 401-407. 34. oneworld.(2018), “oneworld fact sheets”, available at: https://ja.oneworld.com/ (11 December 2018) 35. Oum, T. H., Park, J. H., Kim, K., Yu, C. (2004), “The effect of horizontal alliances on firm productivity and profitability: evidence from the global airline industry”, Journal of Air Transport Management, Vol. 57, pp. 844-853. 36. Park, J. H. (1997), “The effects of airline alliances on markets and economic welfare”, Transportation research: Part E. Logistics and Transportation Review, Vol. 33 No.3, pp. 181195. 37. Pearce, J. A., David, F. (1987), “Corporate mission statements: The bottom line”, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 1 No.2, pp. 109-116. 38. Pejić Bach, M., Schatten, M., & Marušić, Z. (2013), "Data mining applications in tourism: A keyword analysis", Conference Paper of Central European Conference on Information and Intelligent Systems, Sep 18 - Sep 20, 2013, Faculty of Organization and Informatics, Varaždin, Croatia, pp. 26-32. 39. Pejić Bach, M., Krstić, Ž., Seljan, S., Turulja, L. (2019), “Text mining for big data analysis in financial sector: a literature review”, Sustainability, Vol. 11 No.5, pp. 1277. 40. Seo, G. (2019), Strategic Organization Value Sharing of International Airline Alliance: a content analysis of Star Alliance mission statement, Rokkodai Ronshu, Vol. 65 No.4, pp. 2946. Kobe University, Kobe, Japan, 1 March 2019. 41. SkyTeam. (2018), “SkyTeam fact sheets”, available at: https://www.skyteam.com/en/about/ (11 December 2018) 42. Star Alliance. (2018), “Star Alliance fact sheets”, available at: https://flights.staralliance.com/en/ (11 December 2018) 43. Statista. (2017), “Leading airline alliances in 2017, by market share, Leading airline alliances in 2017, by revenue (in billion U.S. dollars)”, available at: https://www.statista.com (11 December 2018) 44. Tiernan, S., Rhoades, D., Waguespack, B. (2008), “Airline alliance service quality performance—an analysis of US and EU member alliances”, Journal of Air Transport Management, Vol. 14, pp. 99-102. 45. Wang, Y., Lin, J. (2011), “Empirical research on influence of mission statements on the performance of nonprofit organizations”, Procedia Environmental Sciences, Vol. 11, pp. 328-333. 46. Weber, K., Sparks, B. (2004), “Consumer attributions and behavioural responses to service failures in strategic airline alliance settings”, Journal of Air Transport Management, Vol. 10, pp. 362-367. 47. Williams Jr., R. I., Morrell, D. L., Mullane, J. V. (2014), “Reinvigorating the mission statement through top management commitment”, Management Decision, Vol. 52 No.3, pp. 446-459. 48. Wright, C. P., Groenevelt, H., Shumsky, R. A. (2010), “Dynamic revenue management in airline alliances”, Transportation Science, Vol. 44 No.1, pp. 15-37. 104 Business Systems Research | Vol. 11 No. 1 |2020 Appendices Appendix A Contents of Star Alliance members’ mission statements Star Alliance Customer Products Location Technology Profitability Philosophy Self concept Public image Employees Safety Partners ADRIA Airways Y Y Y Y N N Y Y Y Y Y AEGIAN Y Y Y Y N N N Y Y Y Y AIR CANADA Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y N Y AIR CHINA Y Y N N Y Y Y Y Y N Y AIR INDIA Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y N AIR NEW ZEALAND Y N Y Y Y Y Y N N N N ANA (All Nippon Airways) Y N N N Y Y Y Y N Y Y ASIANA AIRLINES Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y N Y Austrian Airlines Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y N N Avianca N N Y Y N Y N N Y Y N Avianca Brasil Y Y Y Y N N N N N N Y Brussels Airlines Y N N N N Y N N N N N CopaAirlines Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N N Y Y CROATIA AIRLINES Y Y Y N Y Y N N N N N EGYPTAIR Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y Y Y Ethiopian Y Y Y Y N Y Y N N N N EVA AIR Y Y N N N Y Y N N N Y LOT POLISH AIRLINES Y Y Y N N Y Y N N N Y Lufthansa Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y N Y SAS (Scandinavian Airlines) Y Y Y N N Y Y N Y Y Y Shenzhen Airlines Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N N SINGAPORE AIRLINES N Y N N Y Y N N Y N Y SOUTH AFRICAN AIRWAYS Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y N Y Y Swiss International Air Lines Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y N Y TAP AIR PORTUGAL Y Y N Y Y Y N Y Y N Y THAI Airways Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y TURKISHI AIRLINES N Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y UNITED Airlines Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y N N Source: Author’s work Appendix B Contents of SkyTeam members’ mission statements SkyTeam Customer Products Location Technology Profitability Philosophy Self concept Public image Employees Safety Partners Aeroflot Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Aerolíneas Argentinas Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y N Y N Aeroméxico Y Y Y Y N Y Y N N N N Air Europa Y Y N Y N N Y Y N N Y Air France N Y Y N N Y Y N N N Y Alitalia Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y Y Y China Airlines Y N N N N Y N Y N N N China Eastern Airlines Y N N N N Y N Y Y N Y China Southern Airlines Y N Y N Y Y N N N Y N Czech Airlines N Y Y N N Y Y N N Y Y Delta Air Lines Y N Y N N Y N Y Y N Y Garuda Indonesia Y N Y N Y Y N N N Y Y KLM Y N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y Kenya Airways Y Y Y N N Y N Y Y N N Korean Air Y Y Y Y Y Y N N N N N Middle East Airlines Y Y N N N Y N N N N N Saudia N N Y N N N Y N N N N TAROM Y Y N N N Y Y N N Y N Vietnam Airlines N N Y N Y Y N Y N N Y XiamenAir Y Y N N N N Y Y Y Y N Source: Author’s work 105 Business Systems Research | Vol. 11 No. 1 |2020 Appendix C Contents of oneworld members’ mission statements oneworld Customer Products Location Technology Profitability Philosophy Self concept Public image Employees Safety Partners American Airlines Y N Y N Y N Y N Y N Y British Airways N Y N N N Y Y N N N N Cathay Pacific Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Finnair N Y Y N Y Y Y N N N N Iberia N N Y N Y Y Y N Y N N Japan Airlines Y Y N N Y Y Y Y Y Y N LATAM Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N N Y Y Malaysia Airlines N N Y N N Y Y N N N N Qantas Y N Y Y Y Y N N Y Y N Qatar Airways Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N N N Royal Jordanian Y N Y N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y SriLankan Airlines Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y N N Y S7 Airlines Y Y Y Y N N N N N N Y Source: Author’s work About the author Gang-Hoon Seo is a Ph.D. student in the Graduate School of Business Administration at Kobe University, Kobe. He obtained a master’s degree in Business Administration at Kobe University. His main research interests include business strategy, international marketing, corporate mission statements, and consumer’s word of mouth. The author can be contacted at [email protected]