top of page

Finding the balance: flexible vs rigid travel policy


travel policy - free the bird or keep it caged?

Life rarely gets simpler, especially for business travellers. The pandemic has changed almost everything, from how often we travel and by what mode of transport, to whether we travel at all.


The travel manager’s remit is much wider than it was, with sustainability, diversity and other governance issues introduced into travel policies.


For the many corporates reviewing their travel policies in the wake of Covid, the question is what approach to take going forward? The answer depends on corporate priorities and striking the right balance between cost control, traveller preference and duty of care.


More companies now want to empower their travellers to make decisions that are right for them, and some have gone as far as simply instructing travellers to ‘do the right thing.’ The problem is that statement will be harder to understand for infrequent travellers, who might find a lack of clarity unhelpful at best.


With more SMEs turning to managed travel [1] to support their duty of care obligations, minimise non-essential travel and mitigate the impact of disruption across the UK travel network, the time is right to look at the theory of relaxing travel policies, and the anecdotal evidence available to back it up.


Travellers want flexibility

The truth is that a travel policy that meets the personal needs of every traveller is impossible to achieve. There are simply too many nuances.


Business travellers have been demanding greater flexibility around choosing accommodation and transport mode ever since the latter days of the pandemic. Flexibility is a top priority for Gen Z travellers, particularly in the U.S., where 59% of Gen Z business travellers would rather have a crying toddler in the seat behind them than cede control over when and where they travel on business.[2]


Amongst some larger travel programmes, travellers’ preference for direct flights has seen higher costs trumped by the benefits of reducing emissions and health risks for travellers. Some employers have limited the hours travellers can spend in the air or on the road to optimise wellbeing, reduce the risk of accidents and provide a better work/life balance.

Some larger companies now allow premium air cabins to meet traveller expectations in terms of service, duty of care and to encourage travellers to consider trip ROI. For businesses struggling to fill vacancies, there is also risk. 54% of workers say they would resign their jobs if their employer did not show flexibility in meeting their personal or work-life needs.[3]


That’s why every travel policy has to allow travellers to make decisions that support their unique profiles, by providing education and guidance linked to intuitive technology. However, a balance has to be struck between restrictive and flexible policy because traveller profiles in any organisation can be so varied, thereby risking non-compliance.


Duty of care 2.0

During the pandemic, the mantra in travel management was business-critical travel only. A year on, policy is now more about understanding – and acting upon – traveller perceptions and in ensuring every trip has a return on investment.[4] The workforce is increasingly diverse, meaning that travel policies must address different individual needs, from LGBTQ+ to physical and neurodiversity.


At the same time, duty of care obligations have also changed because more travellers need support, and the nature of that support has changed. Keeping employees safe when travelling has never been more complex.


Travel managers are adopting technology-driven solutions to fulfil their duty of care to employees, using real-time safety data to monitor traveller safety and enabling better decision making. War in Ukraine has added further risk, whilst climate and weather-related disruption are also now part of risk management, and therefore duty of care.


Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion

There are big gaps in most programmes when it comes to supporting such a diverse range of travellers. More than a third of travel managers don’t know whether their organisations have travellers with conditions that impact mobility. 60% feel unprepared to adequately address physical and neuro health needs.[5]


Employees want their company’s commitment to environmental and social sustainability reflected in the policy. They are also not afraid to question the trips they are taking and whether virtual might not be a better use of time and money and be a more sustainable option.


But is it possible to meet the needs of every individual within policy? Probably not. In these cases, the travel policy should provide a framework that provides advice, resources, and support services such as detailed depth destination reports, automated risk alerts and bleisure trips.


Looking ahead

As companies re-think their policies to increase flexibility and meet the needs and preferences of travellers, the key is to acquire accurate insight into what their travellers are doing and thinking.


It is important to recognise the impact of travel programmes on an employee’s experience. So, the policy needs to gain the traveller’s trust, which means tinkering around the edges by changing class of service is unlikely to be enough.


It’s about setting expectations around what travelling smarter looks like, and travel managers’ choice isn’t really between giving travellers greater autonomy or adopting rigid policies. It’s about making sure the travel policy reflects the values of the business. It should provide a supportive framework with guidance and support that allows travellers to make decisions within the scope of that framework.


If you'd like to talk more about how to create a policy that works for your organisation, get in touch with the team.

 
bottom of page