????眼下，讓民航企業高管們輾轉反側、寢食難安的事情眾所周知，它們包括：勞動力成本高昂，燃油價格波動劇烈，法律法規束手束腳，而且航空服務同質化嚴重，很難打動消費者。各民航巨頭的管理層或多或少都嘗試過收購與兼并，希望獲得規模效益，從而解決問題。過去十年中，全美航空（US Airways）與美西航空（America West），達美航空（Delta）與西北航空（Northwest），西南航空（Southwest）與穿越航空（AirTran），法國航空（Air France）與荷蘭皇家航空（KLM）都已經完成合并，最近的例子則是大陸航空（Continental）與美聯航（United）。【有報道稱，全美和達美也正在考慮對陷入破產保護境地的美國航空（American Airlines）下手。】

????可他們或許忽視了更重要的問題：品牌形象。品牌咨詢師和民航專家指出，民航巨頭們只顧經營上的得失，無心關注品牌形象的塑造。沒錯，運營民航公司是個非常復雜的任務，要想成功很不容易，可他們指出，強勢品牌仍然有助于促進機票銷售。品牌咨詢公司Landor and Associates常務董事艾倫?亞當姆森說：“如果三家民航公司都開通了紐約與芝加哥間的航線，那消費者選擇其中某一家，而不是另外兩家的唯一原因就是價格更低。”他指出，一個本就困難重重的企業可不能陷入這樣的尷尬境地。

????規模較小的民航公司通常更善于發揮品牌的作用，以此區別于競爭對手并支持企業發展。“過去，民航業內的成功不是品牌驅動型的，”亞當姆森稱。“只有維珍（Virgin）、西南（Southwest）和捷藍(JetBlue)這幾家例外。”事實證明，這幾家公司深受消費者青睞。根據市場資訊公司JD Power and Associates發布的《2011年北美航空滿意度調查》（2011 North American Airline Satisfaction Study），小型民航的平均得分普遍高于大型企業，而捷藍和西南這樣的航空公司是得分最高的公司。

????當然，這些航空公司的規模比美國航空、美聯航或達美航空小得多，后三家的正式雇員數均達到8萬左右，而西南航空的員工數略超過4萬，捷藍更是只有1.2萬正式員工。西南、捷藍和維珍還采取了措施，從一開始就用各自獨特的企業文化來熏陶雇員。維珍大西洋航空公司北美分部高級副總裁克里斯?羅西認為，維珍領先一步，因為該公司隸屬于維珍集團——一家主要以娛樂為主業的公司。“我們的策略是優先考慮消費者體驗，如何才能讓航空旅行成為令人向往的體驗？”

????多數民航巨頭的基因卻與此迥然不同。南加州大學高效組織中心（the Center for Effective Organizations at the University of Southern California）負責人愛德華?勞勒指出，大型民航公司的高管中很多人都來自軍界。他說：“他們的管理模式非常傳統，強調自上而下的指令，而不一定會給員工以靈活處理的空間，也不了解他們的需求。”但他指出，問題在于高效的客戶服務得靠員工來實現。他補充說：“其他航空公司從來沒有過這種意識。”相反，許多大型民航與其員工的關系頗為復雜。他說，由于航空業的工會相當強大，調動員工都可能很困難。亞當姆森進一步指出，更嚴重的是，剛剛重新洗過牌的民航巨頭里的許多員工都經歷過最慘烈的動蕩——疾風驟雨般的裁員。

????The litany of woes plaguing airline executives is well-known: high labor costs, volatile fuel prices, thorny legislation, not to mention trying to sell a highly commoditized product to customers that love to hate them. Management has more or less tried to solve the problem by merging to achieve economies of scale. In the last ten years, US Airways (LCC) and America West, Delta (DAL) and Northwest, Southwest (LUV) and AirTran, Air France and KLM, and, now, Continental and United (UAL) have hooked up. (US Airways and Delta are reportedly eyeing a bankrupt American Airlines, as well.)

????Here's what they may be missing: their brands. Branding consultants and aviation experts say the big airlines have lost focus on their brands as a result of their drive to make operational gains. Yes, successfully running an airline is bafflingly complex, but a strong identity, they argue, still sells tickets. "If three airlines are flying between New York and Chicago, the only reason to pick one over the other is because it's cheaper," a position no already-strained business wants to find itself in, says Allen Adamson, managing director at brand consultant firm Landor and Associates.

????Smaller airlines have generally been more skilled at wielding their brands to differentiate and sustain their businesses. "Success in the airline business has not, in the past, been brand-driven," Adamson says, "-- with the exception of Virgin, Southwest, JetBlue (JBLU)." Consumers happen to really like those firms. According to a JD Power and Associates 2011 North American Airline Satisfaction Study, smaller carriers tended to score higher on average than larger firms. Top scores went to the likes of JetBlue and Southwest.

????Of course, such airlines are much smaller than American, United or Delta, which each permanently employ about 80,000 people. Southwest, for example, has slightly over half that number of employees; JetBlue employs some 12,000 permanent workers. Southwest, JetBlue and Virgin have also made an effort to steep employees in their respective corporate cultures from the outset. Virgin has a leg up, argues Chris Rossi, senior vice president in North America for Virgin Atlantic Airways, because the airline came from Virgin Group, which is fundamentally an entertainment company. "Our approach was to prioritize the customer experience -- how do we make it something that they look forward to?"

????That isn't the typical DNA at most large airlines. There, a lot of the management came out of the military, says Edward Lawler, the director of the Center for Effective Organizations at the University of Southern California. "Their model was a very traditional, top-down kind of approach that doesn't necessarily give flexibility to employees or listen to what they need." Trouble is, he argues, effective customer service begins with personnel. "That was never built into the other airlines," he adds. Instead, many larger airlines have a complicated relationship with their employees. Shifting around heavily unionized labor forces can be difficult, he adds. What's more, many employees at newly re-shuffled major airlines are the ones who have weathered the worst including seismic layoffs, says Adamson.