RATIONALE FOR AIRPORT CONCEPT

On behalf of the Cape Girardeau Regional Airport Advisory Board, I want to publicly thank the Southeast Missourian for its support of the airport and the board.

The board also would like to publicly thank the mayor, city council and city administrators for their support and willingness to consider the board's recommendations and their strong support of the airport during recent years. As noted in previous Southeast Missourian articles and editorials, the city council has elected to make significant capital improvements to the airport as well as employing an airport manager and staff. It should also be noted that the city manager and staff have invested numerous hours dealing with airport issues during recent months. Those investments and efforts are highly applauded by the board, and we hope the citizens of Cape Girardeau recognize and appreciate the strength of the city council's and city administration's commitment to the airport as a major asset of the community.

As chairperson of the advisory board, I would also like to take this opportunity to clarify the reasoning behind the board's controversial recommendation to change the city's organizational structure by moving the airport and its manager into a position that is more directly linked with the city manager's office.

The board's position is based on the argument that the airport is a unique entity within the city organization with tremendous unrealized potential. Because of its uniqueness and the city council's positions that this asset should grow and develop to meet its real potential, it needs to be in a different position within the city's organizational structure. The board believes the recommended change is necessary to reduce the potential for organizational friction and put the airport manager in a more visible and prominent position to deal with internal and external problems and opportunities.

The airport is a unique entity because it, justifiably, has a very small staff while it must be able to carry out functions and provide services that require equipment and/or services otherwise provided by virtually every city department. Operating in a growth and development mode adds to the strain on the limited resources available to the airport manager. The fact that the airport must draw on the limited resources of all city departments isn't the problem. The problem arises from the fact that the airport and its personnel must operate within an organization.

All of us who have been involved in any way with an organization know that organizations have pecking orders. Informal organizations develop pecking orders based on the strengths, weaknesses, talents and personalities of their members. Formal organizations tend to have built-in pecking orders derived from their organizational structure. When formal organizations give their members titles (manager, assistant manager, department head etc.) and reward them at different levels (pay them at different rates) their pecking orders tend to run up and down the chains of title and reward.

We also know that violating the organizational pecking order generally ruffles feathers regardless of how informally leaders (management) may try to run the organization. Management will, quite often, not sense the ruffled feathers. However, management will observe something that may seem to be completely unrelated, because the violator will ultimately pay the consequences of violating the pecking order. Violators may find it difficult to get simple tasks completed in a timely fashion, because the system simply will not work for them. That is, equipment will not be available, papers get misplaced, and there will be a good excuse for each incident. Ultimately, the violator may appear, in management's eyes, to be incompetent or may be blamed for being a troublemaker simply for trying to get the job done.

I believe that most people will agree that any formal organization that attempts to run informally and gives a low level-of-pecking-order member a broad assignment that spreads the need for cooperation across several internal pecking orders tends to increase the probability that the low-end member will ultimately fail as a result of another member's ruffles feathers.

The airport advisory board has simply recommended that the airport and its manager be removed from the formal positions that naturally place them at the low end of the pecking order. The board didn't suggest an absolute position for the airport and manager. It did suggest that they should be structurally placed in a position that as much as possible will take them out of the pecking order. Hopefully they can operate from a position approximately level with department heads with authority delegated by the city manager and responsibility directly to the city manager.

The intent is to create an environment that will allow the airport manager to access needed equipment and services with reasonable priority from all city departments without violating pecking orders. That environment also should raise both the internal and external perceptions of the level of the airport manager. That is, the airport manager would no longer appear to be a third- or fourth-tier city employee but would appear to all concerned to be the manager of an important, highly visible asset of the city. It is the board's contention that such a move will increase the probability that the airport manager can successfully carry out the missions assigned, including growth and development.

In closing, it is extremely important that every reader recognize that no names have been mentioned. Some of those who have opposed this recommendation have taken positions that make the structural change appear to be personal. The board's recommendation was based solely on the simple belief that the organizational restructuring is in the best interest of the city, because it should help increase the probability of successful management, growth and development of the airport.

William H. Walker is the chairperson of the Cape Girardeau Regional Airport Advisory Board.