ORCHESTRATING AIRPORT STAKEHOLDERS ON ONE ID

INITIATIVE: A SERVICE SCIENCE PERSPECTIVE

FINAL PROJECT

by:
REZA AVIANDRI
Student ID: 29117080

Master of Business Administration Program

School of Business and Management
Bandung Institute of Technology
2019
 ORCHESTRATING AIRPORT STAKEHOLDERS ON ONE ID INITIATIVE:
A SERVICE SCIENCE PERSPECTIVE

REZA AVIANDRI
NIM: 29117080
Master’s Programme, Bandung Institute of Technology, 2019
Thesis Counsellor: Yos Sunitiyoso, ST., M.Eng., Ph. D.

Abstract

One ID initiative is a recommended practice from IATA that involved many stakeholders on
the airport in order to provide seamless, secure passenger journeys through biometric
recognition technology. AP2 as the airport operator has initiative to implement One ID on
Soekarno-Hatta airport, Jakarta.
Steps to achieve it are first situational analysis from Soekarno-Hatta Airport passenger process
by using qualitative approach including benchmarking from Aruba Airport Happy Flow and
Digi Yatra Program in Indian Airport, Focus Group Discussion on airport stakeholder and
interview expert. Then analysing the process model of value co-creation that including co-
experience, co-definition, co-elevation and co-development. From the modelling, we could
see the interactive relationship among airport stakeholders that involved on value co-creation
process to realize One ID initiative. Value Orchestration Platform also modelled for
orchestrating value co-creation process like involvement, curation and empowerment
strategies.
In this research, we use model value co-creation process and value orchestration platform as a
hierarchical service by using service science perspective. We first examine and express the
situation from Airport Passenger Processing in CGK Airport by using qualitative approach.
Then, we analyse a process model of value co-creation consisting of four phases, i.e., co-
experience, co-definition, co-elevation and co-development. The model describes interactive
relationship among stakeholders in Airport by involving value co-creation process to
supporting such collaboration. Finally, we apply three management strategies of value
orchestration platform for orchestrating value co-creation process, i.e., involvement, curation
and empowerment strategies. All the process will be organized on a Project Management
Office.

Keywords: Biometric, Collaboration, Project Management, Service Science

i
ORKESTRASI PEMANGKU KEPENTINGAN BANDARA DENGAN INISIATIF
ONE ID:
SEBUAH PERSPEKTIF ILMU LAYANAN

REZA AVIANDRI
NIM: 29117080

Program Pascasarjana, Institut Teknologi Bandung, 2019

Pembimbing Tesis: Yos Sunitiyoso, ST., M.Eng., Ph. D.

Abstrak

Inisiatif One ID adalah praktik yang disarankan dari IATA yang melibatkan banyak
pemangku kepentingan di bandara untuk menyediakan perjalanan penumpang yang
mulus dan aman melalui teknologi pengenalan biometrik.
Penelitian ini berfokus pada bagaimana model nilai co-creation proses dan nilai
orkestrasi platform menggunakan layanan ilmu perspektif.
Langkah untuk mencapainya adalah analisis situasional pertama dari proses penumpang
Bandara Soekarno-Hatta dengan menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif termasuk
pembandingan dari program DIGI Yatra di Bandara India, Focus Group Discussion
pada pemangku kepentingan bandara dan wawancara ahli. Kemudian menganalisis
model proses Value Co-creation yang meliputi Co-experience, Co-definition, Co-
elevation dan Co-Development. Dari pemodelan, kita bisa melihat hubungan interaktif
antara pemangku kepentingan Bandara yang terlibat dalam proses pembuatan value
bersama untuk mewujudkan inisiatif One ID. Pada akhirnya, value orchestration
platform untuk merancang proses value co-creation seperti keterlibatan, kurasi dan
strategi pemberdayaan.
Dalam penelitian ini, kami menggunakan model nilai pembuatan bersama proses dan
nilai platform orkestrasi sebagai layanan hierarki menggunakan perspektif ilmu
layanan. Kami pertama memeriksa dan mengekspresikan situasi dari pengolahan
penumpang bandara di Bandara CGK dengan menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif.
Kemudian, kami menganalisis model proses penciptaan nilai yang terdiri dari empat
fase, yaitu, Co-pengalaman, Co-definisi, Co-elevasi dan Co-Development. Model ini
menggambarkan hubungan interaktif di antara para pemangku kepentingan di bandara
dengan melibatkan proses co-creation yang bernilai untuk mendukung kolaborasi
tersebut. Akhirnya, kami menerapkan tiga strategi manajemen dari nilai orkestrasi
platform untuk merancang nilai Co-penciptaan proses, yaitu, keterlibatan, kurasi dan
strategi pemberdayaan. Semua proses akan diselenggarakan di kantor manajemen
proyek.

Kata kunci: Biometric, Collaboration, Project Management, Service Science

ii
 Validation Page

ORCHESTRATING AIRPORT STAKEHOLDERS ON ONE ID INITIATIVE:

A SERVICE SCIENCE PERSPECTIVE

By:
REZA AVIANDRI
NIM: 29117080

Master of Business Administration Program

Approved by:

Counsellor
2019

Yos Sunitiyoso, ST., M.Eng., Ph. D.

NIP: 197801192009121000

iii
 Acknowledgements

In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most merciful.

Praise be to Allah Almighty, the Lord of the universe.
And praise be upon Muhammad Rasulullah shallallaahu ‘alaihi wasallam.
This thesis is presented with gratitude and appreciation to:
1. My dear parents and in law of all prayers, support and compassion given to me.
2. My beloved wife, Fadhilla Ramadhina, for her relentless support, assistance and
attention during completion of final project. My beloved son, Muhammad Raufa
Habibi, for his patience and relentless smile that gives me a relentless spirit in
completing the task.
3. Angkasa Pura II’s Board of Directors, for given us the chance to following the
company’s scholarship program on MBA-ITB.
4. My final assignment supervisor, Bapak Yos Sunitiyoso, ST., M.Eng., Ph. D. for his
patience in providing guidance and sharing knowledge in my completion process.
5. All lecturers, mentors and academic staff in Master of Business Administration,
School of Business and Management ITB Program for their spirit and commitment in
sharing the knowledge for us.
6. All SBM ITB-Angkasa Pura II YP57 In-House classmate, and also to my boss and my
colleague in Project Digital Business Angkasa Pura II for their cooperation and
support during the teaching and learning process.
May the whole blessing and goodness be given to them. Finally, the author expects advice and
feedback for better improvement.

Bandung, September 2019

Reza Aviandri

iv
 Acronyms and Abbreviations

AP2 PT Angkasa Pura II (Persero)

IATA International Air Transport Association
DGCA Directorate General of Civil Aviation
DGPCR Directorate General of Population and Civil Registration
AAI Airport Authority of India
AOCC Airport Operation Control Center
EGM Executive General Manager

v
 Table of Contents

Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... i

Abstrak ..................................................................................................................................... ii

Validation Page ....................................................................................................................... iii

Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................. iv

Acronyms and Abbreviations................................................................................................... v

Table of Contents .................................................................................................................... vi

List of Figures ....................................................................................................................... viii

List of Tables .......................................................................................................................... ix

List of Appendices ................................................................................................................... x

Chapter I................................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1

1.1. Background .............................................................................................................. 1

1.2. Company Profile ...................................................................................................... 2

1.2.1. Vision, Mission and Corporate Value .................................................................. 2

1.2.2. Organization Structure ......................................................................................... 3

1.3. Business Situation .................................................................................................... 4

1.3.1. Passenger Processing at Airport ....................................................................... 4

1.3.2. IATA One ID ................................................................................................... 5

1.3.3. AP2 Initiative on One ID ................................................................................. 9

1.4. Business Issue ........................................................................................................ 10

1.5. Problem Statement ................................................................................................. 10

1.6. Research Objectives ............................................................................................... 11

1.7. Research Questions ................................................................................................ 12

1.8. Limitation of Research ........................................................................................... 12

Chapter II ............................................................................................................................... 13

Business Issue Exploration .................................................................................................... 13

2.1. Conceptual Framework .......................................................................................... 13

2.2. Literature Review ................................................................................................... 14

vi
 2.2.1. Value Co-creation Process ............................................................................. 14

2.2.2. Value Orchestration Management Strategies ................................................. 15

2.3. Research Methodology........................................................................................... 16

2.3.1. Data Collection Method ................................................................................. 16

2.3.2. Focus Group Discussion ................................................................................ 17

2.3.3. Interview with expert ..................................................................................... 18

2.3.4. Data Analysis ................................................................................................. 20

2.4. Internal Environment Analysis .............................................................................. 22

2.4.1. Existing Service Blueprint Analysis .............................................................. 22

2.4.2. Fail Point ........................................................................................................ 23

2.5. External Environment Analysis ............................................................................. 25

2.5.1. Benchmarking ................................................................................................ 25

2.5.2. Stakeholder Analysis ...................................................................................... 27

2.6. Root Cause Analysis .............................................................................................. 29

Chapter III .............................................................................................................................. 31

Business Solution ................................................................................................................... 31

3.1. Value Co-creation Process ..................................................................................... 32

3.2. Value Orchestration Platform ................................................................................ 33

3.3. Solution Analysis ................................................................................................... 36

3.3.1. Stakeholder Involvement and Organization ................................................... 36

3.3.2. Proposed Working Group on One ID Initiative ............................................. 37

3.3.3. Proposed Service Blueprint for One ID Initiative .......................................... 39

Chapter IV .............................................................................................................................. 40

Conclusion and Implementation ............................................................................................ 40

4.1. Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 40

4.2. Implementation Plan and Recommendation .......................................................... 40

Bibliography........................................................................................................................... 42

Appendices ............................................................................................................................. 43

FGD Report ........................................................................................................................ 43

vii
 List of Figures

Figure 1 AP2 Millennial Travel Experience Program ............................................................. 2

Figure 2 AP2 Organizational Structure .................................................................................... 3
Figure 3 Airport Passenger Processing .................................................................................... 4
Figure 4 AP2 Passenger Processing Condition ........................................................................ 5
Figure 5 Smart Airport Dashboard - Autogate Immigration .................................................. 10
Figure 6 IATA 20 Years Passenger Forecast ......................................................................... 11
Figure 7 IATA Global Passenger Survey 2018 - Millennial Summary ................................. 11
Figure 8 Two Layer Service................................................................................................... 13
Figure 9 Project Stakeholders Relationship ........................................................................... 14
Figure 10 Management Strategies of Value Orchestration .................................................... 15
Figure 11 AP2 held FGD Biometric Self Service .................................................................. 17
Figure 12 Keyword Analysis Summary ................................................................................. 22
Figure 13 Existing Passenger Processing for Domestic Flight .............................................. 22
Figure 14 Fail Point of Existing Passenger Processing .......................................................... 24
Figure 15 Aruba Happy Flow ................................................................................................ 25
Figure 16 The Digi Yatra Journey Concept ........................................................................... 26
Figure 17 Stakeholder Interest Matrix ................................................................................... 29
Figure 18 Root Cause Analysis on One ID Initiative............................................................. 30
Figure 19 One ID value network............................................................................................ 31
Figure 20 Four-phase value co-creation process model ......................................................... 32
Figure 21 Value Orchestration Platform of One ID Initiative ............................................... 33
Figure 22 Proposed Passenger Processing with One ID ........................................................ 39

viii
 List of Tables

Table 1 One ID Differences from Inheritance Procedures ....................................................... 6

Table 2 Interview Question and Answer from Expert ........................................................... 18
Table 3 Keyword Definition and Coding ............................................................................... 21
Table 4 Keyword Counting .................................................................................................... 21
Table 5 Fail Points Analysis .................................................................................................. 24
Table 6 Stakeholder Mapping for One ID Initiative .............................................................. 28
Table 7 Root Cause Analysis ................................................................................................. 30
Table 8 Involvement Program................................................................................................ 34
Table 9 Curation Program ...................................................................................................... 35
Table 10 Empowerment Program .......................................................................................... 35
Table 11 Working Group for One ID Initiative ..................................................................... 38
Table 12 One ID Initiative Project Timeline.......................................................................... 40

ix
 List of Appendices

FGD Report ………………………………………………………………………………. 43

x
 Chapter I
Introduction

1.1. Background
PT Angkasa Pura II (Persero) also known as AP2 is one of the airport operators in Indonesia.
AP2 manages 16 airports starting from Soekarno-Hatta International Airport (CGK) as the
largest airport to Banyuwangi International Airport (BWX) as the smallest. AP2 has the
company's vision “To Be the Best Smart Connected Airport Operator in The Region” launched
in the 2016-2020 RJPP.
Smart Connected is a terminology used to describe the two ideal conditions that AP2 wants to
realize, namely airports that are Smart and Connected. “Smart” is the use of technology that
allows processes within the airport to be automated, where airport staff are no longer active
actors. This allows for increased throughput through faster processes or better use of terminal
space, and increased security and safety through more accurate detection of dangerous goods.
However, the application costs are linearly correlated with technological advances: from
purchasing equipment to maintenance.
One dimension of Smart is to be "distributed" which allows airports for queue-free processing,
because activities can be done outside the airport, such as online check-in, and so on. However,
distributed activities require a collaborative effort and cannot be applied to all processes, such
as border control. In addition, distributed processes require lower investment costs.
"Connected" is related to collaboration between stakeholders in managing complexity and
operational disruptions. The "Connected" principle includes connectivity with stakeholders
within the airport (Passenger, Airline, Ground Handlers, CIQ, ATC and Security) and around
the airport (taxi operators, trains, traffic data providers, media, etc.), other airports managed
by AP2 (CGK, KNO, etc.), as well as airports other than AP2. The main goal of being
connected is operational reliability and continuous improvement. To achieve this goal, it is
important for airports to first reach the basic key of connected airports, namely the existence
of sources of single truth, followed by giving the stage of business intelligence to achieve
operational benefits, as well as artificial intelligence so that decision making and resource
mobilization can be done automatically.
In 2019 to support the achievement of this vision several main programs were implemented,
namely: Millennial Travel Experience, International Expansion and On Becoming 1 Million
Cargo Movement.

1
Millennial Travel Experience is a program that AP2 focuses on the millennial traveler segment
through developing a portfolio of products and services and improving targeted services by
rejuvenating aspects of operations at the airport. One program that supports the Millennial
Travel Experience is Self Service. AP2 are eager to make a smooth trip for passengers using
their own gadgets and themselves.

Figure 1 AP2 Millennial Travel Experience Program

The current trend of the passengers prefers to do the process of self check-in at the airport by
themselves. Short-haul flights for short holiday times will allow the passenger to carry only a
few luggage. Passengers like this will be happy if it is given the convenience to expedite the
process at the airport.

1.2. Company Profile

1.2.1. Vision, Mission and Corporate Value
Vision statement of AP2 is:
To Be the Best Smart-Connected Airport Operator in The Region.

In order to reach its vision, AP2 has several missions:

1. Ensuring safety and security is a top priority.
2. Providing world-class infrastructure and services to support Indonesia's economic
development through connectivity between regions and countries.
3. Providing a reliable, consistent and enjoyable travel experience to all customers with
modern technology.
4. Develop partnerships to complement capabilities and expand company offerings.
5. Become the preferred State-owned Enterprise (BUMN) and maximize the potential
of each company employee
6. Upholding corporate social responsibility.
2
To achieve company's vision and mission and ensure the alignment of corporate-level planning
and implementation of the Company's operations, the Company Strategy that regulates the
business policies of PT Angkasa Pura II (Persero) and subsidiaries is divided into three
hierarchical levels, Corporate Strategy, Business Strategy, and Functional Strategy.
Functional strategy is an operational model that functions as a support for the business
strategy. Functional strategy does not have a direct impact on the Company's revenue but
supports the implementation of a business strategy.
One operational model of functional strategy PT Angkasa Pura II (Persero) is technology and
operations which focuses on implementing Smart Airport. The application of Smart Airport is
the use of the latest technology both for airport operations and to enhance the passenger
experience. The Smart Airport concept will streamline operations at airports and passenger
services. The latest technology is used to streamline passenger processes to increase passenger
comfort.

1.2.2. Organization Structure

Figure 2 AP2 Organizational Structure

AP2 made the organizational structure to be aware of customer needs changes. In CEO
Message number 43, this option was taken because the era of digital convergence turned out
to generate a new rule of the game where the success of the operator is no longer only in the
capabilities of technology implementation, infrastructure ownership, or the ability to create
service, but above all is the ability in understanding the needs, problems, and expectations of
customers (PT Angkasa Pura II (Persero), 2017). The organizational structure consists of:

3
 1. Head Office Organization (Corporate Office & CEO’s Office)
Perform functions at a corporate level strategy that includes strategic planning
functions, policy making and monitoring evaluation in carrying out directional
strategy, portfolio strategy and parenting strategy.

2. Division Office Organization (Division Office)

Perform functions in the business level strategy which includes the functions of
implementation, organizing and actuating by running a comparative strategy,
competitive strategy and cooperative strategy.

3. Branch Office Organization (Branch Office)

Perform functions in the functional level strategy which includes Operation,
Services, Finance, Human Capital and Innovation functions.

1.3. Business Situation

1.3.1. Passenger Processing at Airport
AP2 as the airport operator has the responsibility to provide and ensure the infrastructure
capacity and facilities are good in the process of facilitating passengers, airlines, cargo and
baggage. In the airport there are various parties working together in the process of serving the
aircraft and passengers. At some airports, the tools and systems they use are owned by the
airport or its strategic partners. The passenger service process is one part of the complex value
chain. Below is the airport passenger processing journey:

Figure 3 Airport Passenger Processing

As a passenger of an airlines, we must through the process at the airport before on board to an
airplane. A passenger will pass through these processes: Check-in, passenger should give their
document and booking reference to the ground staff at counter; once scanned and validated
they will receive a boarding pass which will be a valid document to enter the waiting room
and board the plane. If there is any luggage to checked in, they will get the luggage tag as the
proof of ownership of the goods.

4
 For international passengers, they will then pass through immigration officers for passport
inspections. Thereafter it will pass through security checks by the aviation security personnel
to enter the departure lounge area. At this point passenger will be checked for boarding pass
validity and identity matching. When the departure time has arrived, all passengers will enter
the boarding gate one by one by first doing the identity and boarding pass check by the ground
handling personnel.
On AP2 airport, the departure passenger processing system could be defined as picture below:

Check-in Security Check Border Control Waiting Lounge Boarding

• ID Check • ID check • ID check • Check Boarding Pass • Boarding Pass Check
• Manual counter • Boarding Pass Check • ID check
• Manual Baggage • Baggage Screening • Manual boarding
drop
• Self Checkin

Figure 4 AP2 Passenger Processing Condition

From above picture, there are several times passenger need to show their ID (KTP or Passport)
and Boarding pass to airport and airline staffs. This process can cause difficulties for
passenger. Sometimes people were missing their ID or boarding pass on the passenger flow
process.
Based on interview with Aviation Security Officer at Terminal 3 CGK, looking for the event
report data, it was found that in a year there were more than 30 reports of ID (KTP or Passport)
documents lost. This is due to the negligence of the passenger in storing and presenting
documents when the document checks occurred (Aviation Security Officer of Terminal 3,
telephone interview, 03/08/2019).

1.3.2. IATA One ID

In line with the AP2 mission statement “Providing world-class infrastructure and services to
support Indonesia's economic development through connectivity between regions and
countries”, AP2 started to adjust with the global standard initiative. One of the programs is
IATA One ID. The IATA board has also provided guidance on the One ID program. In this
global world, eighty-two percent of total airlines created representative association called
IATA. They support several areas of aviation activity and facilitate formulate business policy
on essential aviation problems. On the airport area, IATA propose One ID Concept to make
seamless travel.
IATA has a vision to realize the "end-to-end passenger experience that is seamless, efficient,
and secure" by delivering service to passengers in a smooth airport process and allowing you
to walk through the airport without having to hurry and worry about missed the plane.
As one of IATA's seriousness in supporting passenger service improvement, it is issued a
concept paper which details the One-ID initiative designed with a strong and measurable
approach to identity management. The paper provides guidance on realizing a passenger
5
journey using biometric recognition technology for a smooth and secure journey, while
ascertain that the One ID tries to present a streamlined, friction-free and traveler driven
procedure that allows a person to state their identity, on the internet or in person, to the required
level at each procedure, while keeping up the protection of individual information. This will
take into consideration an increasingly customized client experience to be conveyed, cost-
effectiveness to be improved, security advantages to be picked up, and the chance to produce
upgraded ancillary income. Empowering quicker methods for building up a believed
personality can break the customary worldview when security and traveler assistance come to
the detriment of each other, enabling both to be improved at the same time.
The idea depends on early approval of the traveler's identity, and controlled access to this data
by the different public and private stakeholders required on a need-to-know and approved to-
know premise, with the goal that the traveler can be perceived and took care of in the most
proficient manner in resulting procedure steps.
However, genuine advancement must be accomplished through cooperation between airlines,
airports, border agencies, screening experts and possibly different partners – all of which have
at last as a lot to pick up from a planned methodology as the traveler. IATA is clearly
positioned to help encourage this change by conveyance along all stakeholders inside the air
travel continuum, together with governments. The thought is to make a future where travelers
can travel all around utilizing their biometric, without trading off their security – while getting
a charge out of commonplace and straightforward identity check forms any place they are.
This will require new guidelines to encourage coordinated effort between airports, airlines and
governments when checking traveler identity – much as e-Passport do today – while giving
governments the opportunity to deal with their borders as per their security requirements for
worldwide interoperability dependent on regular benchmarks and best practices.
The following table, however rearranged and incomplete, portrays how this methodology on
a very basic level differs from the inheritance procedures:

Table 1 One ID Differences from Inheritance Procedures

Point of Passenger Description Inheritance Procedures One ID

Process
Ready to fly Ejhaxs begin his trip 1. Admissibility: is 1. ID check: is this
Ejhaxs approved to Ejhaxs?
travel to 2. Admissibility: is
destination? Ejhaxs approved to
2. ID might be travel to
checked relying destination?
upon area and 3. Keep data for next
travel situation: is process.
this Ejhaxs?
Bag gage drop Ejhaxs needs to ID might be checked This is Ejhaxs; baggage
check his bags relying upon area and drop is ready for him.
travel situation: is this
Ejhaxs?

6
 Aviation security Ejhaxs will go 1. Admissibility: is This is Ejhaxs; he is
check and access to through security and Ejhaxs approved to approved to go through
the security restricted proceed to the enter? security and proceed to
area security restricted 2. ID might be checked the security restricted
area relying upon area and area; security screening
travel situation: is this protocol “A” will be
Ejhaxs? activated
Immigration Ejhaxs will go to 1. Admissibility: is This is Ejhaxs;
departure control cross the border and Ejhaxs approved to performing background
leave the country cross the border? check; after approved
2. ID check: is this he could cross the
Ejhaxs? border and leave the
nation
Embarkation Ejhaxs will board the 1. Admissibility: is This is Ejhaxs; he is
plane Ejhaxs approved to approved to board the
board? plane
2. ID might be checked
relying upon area
and travel situation:
is this Ejhaxs?
Immigration arrival Ejhaxs will arrived at 1. Admissibility: is This is Ejhaxs;
control the airport and cross Ejhaxs approved to individual verifications
the border and enter cross the border? have just been
the country 2. Identity check: is performed, and he is
this Ejhaxs? endorsed to cross the
border and enter the
nation
Return trip – ready to Ejhaxs is traveling 1. Admissibility: is This is Ejhaxs; he is
fly back home Ejhaxs approved to approved to travel
travel?
2. ID might be
checked relying
upon area and travel
situation: is this
Ejhaxs?
Courtesy: (IATA, 2018)

So as to accomplish this in the best, proficient and secure way, the accompanying four
components should be set up:
1. Trusted, Digital Identity
ID checks infer finding out that the traveler is who they state they are (and not a
faker). Furthermore, expect 1-to-1 match of the traveler against an unquestionable
source. This might be done physically by looking at the traveler’s profile against an
image ID, (for example, a passport book), or by overlooking the traveler’s biometrics
against those captured before in a biometric ID (for example the e-Passport).
Regardless of the expansion of machine readable zones (MRZ) and the presentation
of biometric passports have improved information exactness and the security of
passports, as long as we depend on the use of physical IDs little progress will be
made in improving speed and simplicity with which identity can be confirmed and
checked.
With the utilization of a trusted, digital identity won’t just facilitate real progress in
terms of speed and simplicity of ID confirmation and check, it will likewise enable
7
 travelers to affirm their ID online and in off-airport circumstances, in this manner
opening the possibility to move more processes off-airport and have travelers
arriving at the airport “ready to fly”. Preferably, the authorization using digital will
be associated with the digital ID, expelling in the more extended term the
requirement for travelers to convey physical ID and travel records with them.
The Indian Aadhaar biometric system is one good example for this. Digital ID might
be (temporarily) stored on a cloud-based digital platform. On the other way, the
digital ID physical token or stored in a mobile phone; the accessibility of biometric
sensors on client cell phones could show a chance to utilize these savvy gadgets
rather than costly, static airport framework.
To further enhance the process of asserting identity and trust placed in digital
identity, a combined approach can be considered, utilizing information from partners
to help assess passenger identity.

2. Identity Management Platform (IMP)

The One ID concept is entirely dependent on a collaborative approach between
stakeholders. For this to work, an environment needs to be created where they can
store, share, reuse, and change passenger information in a collaborative and reliable
way - managing data envelopes that follow the passenger along the way. This is what
we call the identity management platform (IMP), whose operations are governed by
a framework of trust that exists among the participating stakeholders.
The IMP data envelope contains passenger identity data and signals for passenger
processing, not with the aim of replacing other systems such as the airline’s
Departure Control System (DCS) or border authority management system, but with
the aim of connecting this system and enabling a more efficient, streamlined and not
repeated process.
The “privacy by design” principle was being the basis of IMP preparation,
guaranteeing that stakeholders only can access to passenger data on a “have-to-
know” and “approved-to-know” premise. Data security and privacy regulations must
be made and strictly adhered to.
The addition of process information in the IMP data envelope will make real-time
visibility where passengers are in the airport process. This will allow for a more
personalized customer experience to be delivered, further efficiencies are made, and
opportunities to generate additional revenue are enhanced.
To connect the departure, transfer and arrival processes for a truly seamless
passenger experience, IMPs operating in different air travel ecosystems must be
interoperable.

8
 3. Identity Verification through Biometric Recognition
After a passenger is registered at IMP, 1-to-N biometric recognition is used for
instant identity verification throughout various process steps, eliminating the need to
physically present documents and credentials at each point of contact.
To the extent possible, and with passenger approval, biometric registration is fixed
for a specified period and does not need to be repeated for each trip.

4. Trust Framework
In general terms, a trust framework is a set of legally enforceable specifications, rules
and agreements governing a multi-party system that is established for a common
purpose, is designed to carry out certain types of transactions among participating
communities and is bound by general regulating requirements.
For stakeholders to trust each other, trust data and work together on a shared identity
management platform, a trust framework must be established between them. This
will explain each other's roles, rights, responsibilities and obligations, include
business and technical requirements and specifications, identify applicable laws and
regulations, determine financial arrangements, and explain how the trust framework
will be governed - including policies related to compliance and quality assurance.
Such a framework of trust can exist at the level of the local air travel ecosystem - for
example an airport plus a number of airlines and control authorities - but to allow
wider collaboration across end-to-end passenger trips and in various travel scenarios,
rules will also have to be established at the national and international level; which
can, for example, take the form of mutual recognition and harmonization of
standards.

1.3.3. AP2 Initiative on One ID

AP2 has taken several steps to adjust to the improvement of airport passenger processes. Some
initiatives that have been done by AP2 in improving services for airline passengers are
provision of self check-in kiosks, self baggage tag and baggage drop.
In line with the effort to realize the Millennial traveler program, AP2 must also complement
several processes in the implementation of the One ID initiative. Based on the concept of
IATA, that One ID requires a new device investment that does not exist in Soekarno-Hatta
airport. But no less important is the process of collaboration between stakeholders that must
have started from an early stage.

9
1.4. Business Issue
With lack of experience and the absence of regulation for biometric recognition on passenger
processing, there are possibilities that the airport stakeholder will not ease to follow the
initiative. The undesirable outcome could be like AP2 implement the One ID in the airport,
but no airlines want to use it.
Evidence that shown problem is the Immigration Auto Gate machine on Terminal 3 has some
problem since it was operated. The average success rates of the Auto Gate are only about
50%. It could be happening again if AP2 doesn’t collaborate with stakeholders on One ID
initiatives.

Figure 5 Smart Airport Dashboard - Autogate Immigration

1.5. Problem Statement

There are several problems that might be appear on AP2 One ID initiatives:
1. Indonesian aviation currently doesn’t have regulation about biometric recognition
for passenger processing. Some of the airports and airlines has begun the biometric
recognition for passenger processing. Example: Queen Beatrix International Airport
- (AUA) in Aruba with Happy Flow, Bengaluru Airport (BLR) with Digiyatra, and
Changi Airport (SIN) Terminal 4 with FAST.
2. AP2 want to implement the One ID concept but still lack of experience on it.
However, it is likely that this must be implemented in the next 5 years, considering
that Indonesia in 2035 will become the world's top 5 in the world of aviation and of
course technological and digital advances are needed to reduce the queue on
passenger processing.

10
 Figure 6 IATA 20 Years Passenger Forecast

3. Passenger processing time is relatively longer because of repeated flight documents

check on different checkpoints, causing stress on the passengers. Based on IATA
Global Passenger Survey (GPS) on 2018, two from four top wanted improvement
from passenger needs are people want to travel simple and efficient, conscious and
paperless. Also, passenger want to be fast, intuitive and self-serviced airport
experience.

Figure 7 IATA Global Passenger Survey 2018 - Millennial Summary

1.6. Research Objectives

Based on the problems mentioned earlier, that AP2 does not yet have a method in carrying out
an initiative that involves many stakeholders, then this thesis is written to:
a. Give academic literature for AP2 on every new initiative that involve stakeholders
with the Service Science, Management & Engineering (SSME) approach.
b. To identify the gap between existing airport passenger processing and One ID
(proposed) passenger processing.
c. Put forward a model of the value co-creation process and value orchestration platform
from perspective of service science,
d. Converse about value orchestration management strategies by referring to current
normal process.
e. Propose the Project Management model for orchestration the One ID initiative.

11
1.7. Research Questions
To accomplish this research objective, some of research questions has provided as per below:
1. How to involve stakeholders in Service Science, Management & Engineering?
2. What are the existing airport passenger processing? And what about the One ID?
3. What is the benefit for implementing One ID Concept?
4. How to design the steps that must be done using Service Science Management and
Engineering (SSME) approach?
5. How to design the Project Management model for the orchestration process?

1.8. Limitation of Research

To get results that fit the context, then this final project is limited to these scopes:
1. This research is conducted for Soekarno-Hatta International Airport (CGK airport)
on domestic passengers processing.
2. This research using Service Science, Management and Engineering (SSME)
framework on Value Co-Creation and Value Orchestration Platform.

12
 Chapter II
Business Issue Exploration

2.1. Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework is a form of framework that will be used to get a general
understanding of this thesis. Objective of this thesis is to give academic literature for AP2 on
every new initiative that involve stakeholders. We propose to use Service Science approach.
IBM introduced Service science, Management, and Engineering (SSME) as a term to depict
an interdisciplinary way to deal with the study, design, and implementation of service systems
– complex systems in which explicit game plans of people and technologies take actions that
offer some benefits for other people. To make an organization mutually beneficial for itself
and for others, an SSME approach is used (wikipedia.org, 2009).
In the middle of service system entities, there are some study of service value co-creation
circumstances (Ng & Maul, 2011). The emerging of service science as the result of cross
discipline for the (1) adapting process of service system entities and Value co-creations
circumstances study and (2) tuition for the education of twenty-first-century T-shaped service
innovators from all disciplines, sectors and cultures who may become social value generators
through cross functional engagements (Spohrer, Demirkan, & Lyons, 2015).
To create the advance development and increase the productivity of service is the objective of
service science. Advance development or innovation as the essential of valuable service and
comes from a blend of diverse knowledge. At this point, encouraging the interdisciplinary
approach is pivotal to the process. Quantifying the value co-creation is complicated and must
consider many rational and experiential aspects.

Service System

Figure 8 Two Layer Service

This One ID initiative will be created in a series of project involving stakeholders, so it is

necessary to create a project management that is orchestration by AP2 as an airport operator.
Through the process of project management, all related stakeholder should be managed wisely.
The project organization is the momentary structure that includes project roles, responsibilities
and levels of authority and boundaries that need to be defined and communicated to all
stakeholder of the project (ISO, 2012). It might incorporate the accompanying jobs and
obligations:
13
 a. Project manager, the one who leads and manages project activities and is responsible
for task fruition;
b. Project management team, some peoples responsible in leading and managing the
project activities to support the project manager;
c. Project team, which performs project activities.
Besides the project organizations, there are some stakeholders acting as the project governance
that may involve the following:
a. Project sponsor, who authorizes the project, settles an executive’s choices and takes
care of issues and clashes past the undertaking project manager’s authority;
b. Project steering committee or board, provide guidance on the senior level to the
project;
c. Customers or customer representatives, define project requirements and accepting the
project deliverables;
d. Suppliers, as the supplier of resources for the project;
e. Project management office, has responsibility on performing various activities such
as governance, standardization, project management training, project planning and
project monitoring.
Below is the illustration of Project Stakeholders:

Figure 9 Project Stakeholders Relationship

2.2. Literature Review

2.2.1. Value Co-creation Process

In the process mentioned above, AP2 should involve all stakeholders related, where the
process of value co-creation consists of 4 (four) phases, namely:

14
 a. Co-Experience
As an initial process in the process of the value of co-creation and as a process of
collaborative value, customers and stakeholders have little information about the
interests and expectations of each party. Through the co-experience phase, customers
and shareholders, with relevant airport managers, can find out the internal models
that meet the relevant needs of all relevant parties.
b. Co-Definition
With the help of each other, customers and stakeholders can choose the preferences,
capabilities and expectations of each party so that they can jointly develop internal
models;
c. Co-Elevation
Co-Elevation is a process to increase customer expectations and capabilities of
stakeholders;
d. Co-Development
Co-development focusing on creating innovations together as a result of ongoing
collaboration between customers and stakeholders, which generally addresses the
context of customer-sourced evaluations.

2.2.2. Value Orchestration Management Strategies

Figure 10 Management Strategies of Value Orchestration

To get the value of value co-creation, there are 3 (three) management process needed from the
value orchestration platform (Kijima & Arai, Value Co-Creation Process and Value
Orchestration Platform, 2016), namely:
a. Involvement is a process of inviting interested parties to do co-experience and co-
definition, namely the role to build mutual understanding.
b. Curation to interpret new services generated by re-gathering content. Curation
process is collects, selects, analyzes, edits and re-examines the content and meaning
15
 of existing products, service and information on customers and providers to provide
a new interpretation of and a new meaning to them.
c. Empowerment mutual strengthening and development processes. Customers are
empowered by lifting their aspiration level, where providers are empowered by
referring to their capability of providing service.

2.3. Research Methodology

2.3.1. Data Collection Method
In qualitative research there are several methods for information or data gathering (atlan.com,
2019). The subsequent information is commonly recorded and after that analysed utilizing one
of a scope of techniques for examination. The three principle strategies for information
gathering are:
a. Focus Group: in this technique for information gathering, the researcher unites few
subjects/ respondents to discuss on the territory of intrigue. The group size is kept
deliberately little, so its individuals can pass on conclusion energetically. A 'theme
control' to encourage discussion is normally arranged ahead of time and the researcher
regularly drives the gathering to guarantee that an assortment of aspects of the subject
are found. The information is regularly copied, at that point interpreted and dissected.
b. Direct observation: in this strategy, information can either be collected by an external
observer (often termed as a non-participant observer) or by a participant observer who
can be a part of staff performing normal duties while observing the processes. In this
type of study, the researcher tries to become a part of the population being examined.
In this way the researchers they can get an in-depth insight of the values and beliefs
of the members of the population.
c. In-depth interviews: in interviews, normally subjects are met exclusively. Interviews
in qualitative research are commonly wide going, penetrating issues in details. They
rarely involve asking a set of pre-set questions. As a substitute, they convince subjects
to pass on their perspectives in detail.
Data for this thesis were collected from Focus Group Discussion (FGD) between airport
stakeholders. AP2 held FGD for implementation of biometric recognition in Soekarno-Hatta
and Banyuwangi Airport. Other data also collected from benchmarking with other program
related to biometric recognition, internal data, and interview with expert.

16
2.3.2. Focus Group Discussion
In order to get to know early and introduce the One ID initiative to the stakeholders, AP2 held
an FGD activity for one day at the Auditorium AP2 headquarters. FGD held in AP2 on July
17th, 2019. The FGD focus on two topics. First is the regulation of biometric recognition and
the second is stakeholder readiness.

Figure 11 AP2 held FGD Biometric Self Service

FGD participants are:

1. DGCA (Directorate General of Civil Aviation), Ministry of Transportation
Head of Sub-Directorate of Standardization and Cooperation of Aviation Security
2. IATA Country Manager Indonesia
3. Secretary General of Board of Airline Representative in Indonesia
4. Garuda Indonesia Airlines
5. Indonesia AirAsia
6. Citilink Airways
7. PT. Gapura Angkasa
8. PT. CAS
9. Expert from Vision Box as the solution provider

At the event there were four issues raised to the surface, namely:
1. How to verify ID in the FGD Biometric Services (passenger safety) solution?
2. How about passenger data storage? How long it will be stored? Are there
regulations?
3. Does biometrics increase On Time Performance?
4. How big is stakeholder readiness?

From the FGD that have been conducted, the recommended things are as follows:

17
 1. It needs to be compiled regarding the analysis of the requirements for the
implementation of biometric self-service and some things needed by the
government, which are then shared with The Ministry of Transportation will conduct
discussions on the regulations that are needed with Airline.
2. When implementing all stakeholders must be involved, so that all stakeholders can
provide aspirations and input, so that when the implementation can run smoothly.
3. To involve all airlines at the time of implementation, both in placement hardware
and passenger flow testing.
4. Implementation of Biometric Self Service must be strengthened by the regulation of
the parties The Directorate of Air Aviation Security, so that stakeholders can get it
well carry out this project.
5. It is necessary to ensure the data sharing mechanism and the integration of existing
systems against implementation of Biometric self-services
6. Consider the readiness of the Airlines as well as the risk implications of the
Biometric implementation self-services, the implementation will be carried out in
stages, for the initial stage the implementation of PT AP II will focus on Airlines
who are ready for Biometric Self solutions Services namely Air Asia at terminal 2F
and Garuda Indonesia at Terminal 3 and at the Banyuwangi Airport.

2.3.3. Interview with expert

Interview activities have been conducted to the experts from the Vision box who have
implemented the implementation of One ID in several major airports in the world. To explore
from the solution provider side, we invited Vision Box Managing Director Asia Pacific to
answer some questions as per table below.

Table 2 Interview Question and Answer from Expert

No Subject Questions & Answers

1 Introduction
2 Strategic Objectives
Can you introduce Vision Box?
Vision box is a private owned company founded at 2001,
headquarters located at Portugal and has representatives on
other 5 continents. As the leader on border automation, VB
has installed on more than 80 airports worldwide.
How VB related to One ID initiative?
On VB we call it Seamless Travel. Focused on passenger
experience to create seamless process using biometrics, and
maximum eligibility for passenger flow. Based on the
challenges for the future of aviation which in 2035 there will
be 7.8 billion passengers who will fly per year, and also the
growth of airport infrastructure that does not fit the pace of
passenger growth, as well as growing desires to increase
non-aero income per passenger, a solution is needed to
streamline the passenger service process.

18
Our vision on seamless travel is to reduce multiple action
showing ID and boarding pass done by passenger to prove
themselves on airport passenger processing.
The most important thing is building the foundation of
Seamless Travel from the airport stakeholder involvement.

What is the value proposition from Seamless Travel?

Based on the Arthur D. Little analysis on ACI with seamless
travel we could:
1. Increase landside & airside capacity up to 15 – 20 %.
2. Increase revenue by 5 – 20%.
3. Reduce operational costs and necessary investment
by down to 15%.
4. Increase security, speed and punctuality.

What is VB solution for One ID initiative?

VB will create collaborative platform to connect stakeholders
with trusted chain of identity, use Open API via web services
for interoperability. With all the experience that VB has, we
understand the use cases from all angles.
Can you describe the Biometric Self-service on VB solution?
With the OrchestraTM Platform, we will integrate set of
reusable functions. Using API catalogue based on SOP and
Web standards.

Process of Self Check-in are:

1. Automatic process;
2. Passengers have a passport / ID card;
3. Details of the passport / ID card is used as
confirmation of the order;
4. Faces are captured and verified with a passport / ID
card;
5. The Boarding process is complete, and the Boarding
pass is printed;
6. Passengers are ready to proceed to flight services.

Process of Self Boarding Gate are:

1. Passengers scan the Boarding Pass on Self Boarding
Gate;
2. The captured face is then verified with face data that
was previously captured at self-check in;
3. If the boarding pass and face have been successfully
verified, the boarding gate will open, and passengers
can proceed to the next process;
4. As a contingency plan, manual gates are still
provided with the aim of anticipating if passengers
cannot successfully verify biometric check-in for
passengers who are not suitable on self-boarding
gate.

Is it any security considerations?

Yes, it is. VB manage user data access controls and using
standard Privacy Certified by Design from Ryerson
University.

the main things that must be considered in encouraging the

software architecture:
1. To maintain the difference between the component
solutions and information stored in the customer safe
zone, Vision-Box and public access zones.

19
 2. Sensitive information cannot be stored on hardware
and software components in the Public Access Zone
To minimize the transmission of sensitive data and if
possible, only send data that is not sensitive and not
personalized.
3. Orchestra solutions from Vision-box have privacy
with design certification. Passenger personal data
(biography and biometrics) will be analyzed by a
software platform designed with maximum protection
and privacy with minimal risk of leakage.
In addition, privacy is based on design principles that are
applied from the beginning into information infrastructure
design (for unlimited flow), aiming to comply with and be
prepared for any future system additions including:
1. Partners (more airlines);
2. Features (mobile phone registration, retail and pre-
cleaning);
3. Technology (AI, deep learning, IoT, robotics);
4. Data regulations for compliance on General Data
Protection Regulation (GDPR);

3 Expectation What is your expectation of One ID initiative?

Based on IATA 2016 passenger survey results passenger are
willing to:
a. Go ahead, make use of my data
b. Eliminate duplication on process
c. I want to shop instead of queue.
For stakeholder benefit will get:
a. Early access to data/ action
b. Monitor airport journey
c. Monitor throughput per agent
d. Reduced admin task
e. Trusted actions
f. Unique identity certainty
g. Risk-based approach
We also hope in Indonesia, our solution would be the
solution for all stakeholders in airport especially on
passenger processing.

2.3.4. Data Analysis

Based on the FGD, we try to identify any keywords related to One ID initiative that happen
and mentioned, spoken or written, by the participants. Tdhe data could be found on appendix
– FGD Report.

20
 Table 3 Keyword Definition and Coding

related to: regulation, poli cy, l egal

C1 Regul a ti on

related to: preparation, ready to follow, support, reliabl e system

C2 Rea di ne s s

related to: data protection, network security, GDPR, source of data

C3 Da ta Pri va cy & Securi ty

related to: integration platform, data shari ng, i nformati on shari ng,
C4 Da ta Integra ti on (Sha ri ng)

related to: ID Card, Indonesian KTP,

C5 e -KTP da ta (ID)

related to: cooperation, collaboration between stakehol der, further

Keyword C6 Sta kehol de r Col a bora ti on discussion, mutual agreement, wil l accommodate, task force, coordi nati on

Ne eds for Bi ometri c s el f related to: needs for biometric

C7
s e rvi ce
related to: service improvement, survey, customer experience
C8 Servi ce Improvement

related to: cost, budget, charge

C9 Cos t

related to: why use biometric self-servi ces? What benefit wi ll get?
C10 Benefi t for Ai rl i nes

related to: how to treat? SLA, Time requirement, How to placement? How to
C11 SOP & SLA verify? Contigency plan

Table 4 Keyword Counting

Keyword
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11
No Ins ti tuti on - Pos i ti on Regul ati on Rea di nes s Da ta Da ta e-KTP data Stakehol de Ne eds for Service Cost Bene fi t for SOP & SLA
Pri va cy & Integra ti on (ID) r Bi ome tri c Improvemen Ai rl i nes
Se curi ty (Sha ri ng) Col abora ti s el f s ervi ce t

1 Hea d of Sub Di rectora te, 1 1 1 on

1 1 1
Sta ndardi zati on & Avi a ti on Securi ty
2 IATA Country Ma na ger of Indonesi a 1 1 1
3 AOC 1 1 1 1 1
4 Vi s i on Box 1 1 1 1 1

5 AP2 - Chi e f of Probi s Di gi tal Ai rport 1 1

6 Ai rAsi a Indones i a 1 1 1 1
7 Vi s i on Box 1 1

8 Ga ruda Indone si a 1 1
9 AP2 - VP of Ai rport Opera rti on Pol i cy 1 1 1
10 AP2 - Probi s Di gi ta l Ai rport 1
11 AP2 - Ass . Man. Di gi ta l Servi ce T3 1 1
12 AP2 - SM of OOC 1
13 Li on Group - As s. Man. Re gi ona l CGK 1
14 Boa rd of Ai rl i ne s Repres entati ve i n 1 1
Indones i a - Secre tary Gene ral
15 Ga ruda Indone si a - Se rvi ce Anal ys t 1 1
16 Garuda Indone si a - IT Bus i ness 1 1 1
Sol uti on
17 Garuda Indone si a - IT Ge ne ral 1 1 1
Appl i cati on Ana l yst
18 Garuda Indone si a - Manager 1 1 1
Operati ona l Improve ment
19 Ci ti l i nk Indones i a - IT 1 1 1
20 Ci ti l i nk Indones i a - Lega l 1
21 Ci ti l i nk Indones i a - IT 1
22 AP2 - Ai rport Se rvi ce As sura nce Offi cer 1
23 AP2 - Ass . Man. Di gi ta l Servi ce T2 1 1 1
TOTAL 7 7 3 8 1 11 2 4 6 4 6

21
The results as per diagram below:

Figure 12 Keyword Analysis Summary

Based on the above data, stakeholder collaboration is the most important thing that need to be
exist before the initiative of One ID.

2.4. Internal Environment Analysis

2.4.1. Existing Service Blueprint Analysis
To find out the current passenger processing activities in Soekarno-Hatta Airport, a blueprint
of its activities will be drawn as Figure 13 below. Start from ordering flight into boarding the
plane.

Figure 13 Existing Passenger Processing for Domestic Flight

22
When passenger order the flight, Airline Computer Reservation System (CRS) will give the
Passenger Name Record (PNR) code to passenger as the booking code. After that, passenger
will report to the check-in counter at the airport by giving the PNR code. Ground staff will
check the validity of the PNR code and ID. ID could be the e-KTP or Passport (foreigner).
Then passenger will receive the Boarding pass. For those passengers who have their luggage
to be checked in, they need to process baggage check-in on counters. Passengers will receive
a bag tag sticker as proof.
After completing the process above, passenger will enter the boarding lounge area. But before
that, passengers will be checked by aviation security. They will check the validity of boarding
pass matched with the ID and checks on dangerous goods. For passengers who will use the
lounge facility, they will be asked for a boarding pass by the lounge attendant.
When the departure time has arrived, passengers will be asked to board through the boarding
gate. One by one will be asked for the boarding pass and ID by the ground officers. When
valid, the passenger is welcome to board the aircraft. The boarding pass will be scanned as
renewal data to the airline's DCS system.
Seen in the picture that the passengers repeatedly perform the process of spending documents
in the form of boarding passes and ID. This becomes a recurring process that needs process
efficiency.

2.4.2. Fail Point

To provide an overview of the error or problem conditions that can occur in a service system
we use the fail point. Based on the service blueprint of existing passenger processing on Figure

23
13 and the result of benchmarking and site visit in CGK Airport, we found the fail points as
figure below.

Figure 14 Fail Point of Existing Passenger Processing

Table 5 Fail Points Analysis

Fail Points Analysis

Security Check Process
Boarding Process
After plane depart
AP2 Data
Each passenger must present an ID and a boarding pass to the officer
before entering the security inspection area.
Problem: This could lead a problem when the passenger in last minute
call.
Airlines should check the validity of ID and Boarding pass that held
by passenger.
Problem: repeatedly action takes more time and human resources to
check. Potential for human error.
Airlines will print the final manifest and then give the copy to AP2
manually. AP2 will collect the data from final manifest then entry to
the system for billing.
Problem: manual entry needs more effort and human resources.
Potential for human error.
There is currently no real-time system integration between AP2 and
the airline against passenger processing across the check points.
Process is done manually by submitting the manifest printout at the
end of the flight.
Problem: no real-time data. Need more time and human resources.

24
2.5. External Environment Analysis

2.5.1. Benchmarking
a. Happy Flow Aruba Airport
Aruba International Airport also known as Aeropuerto Internacional Reina Beatrix located on
an island in the Caribbean Sea. To improve passenger processing in Aruba, the Aruba
International Airport, the Netherlands, KLM, the Schipol Group and Vision BoxTM has
developed Happy Flow in a collaborative effort.

Figure 15 Aruba Happy Flow

There are two main goals from Aruba Happy Flow:

1. To streamline passenger processing and improve their experience in a revolutionary
way;
2. To test the first pre-clearance border control process from the Americas to the EU-
Schengen area.
This complete end-to-end solution consists of an efficient sequence of user-centric self-service
touch points, from check-in to boarding the plane. Passenger’s face image will be the
identification token at all passenger touchpoints. Passengers are only asked to show their
passport once, at check-in, when they also control their biometric data. After that, they move
25
through all stages of the airport identified in the Passenger Touch Point which is easy to use
by face recognition cameras that identify them from their faces.

b. Digi Yatra at Airport Authority of India

One of the countries that successfully implement the concept of One ID is the Indian state with
the name of Digi Yatra program which was conducted early stage trial on July, 22nd 2019 at
Kempegowda International Airport, Bengaluru (BLR) (Vision Box, 2019). The Airport has
partnered with Vistara Airlines to launch the One-ID biometric platform technology,
developed and installed by Vision-Box, which will enable passengers to breeze through BLR
Airport. After the completion of the final phase by early next year, it is expected to be the
largest deployment of an end-to-end paperless biometric program in Asia with over 350
passenger touchpoints at BLR Airport Terminal 1.
The first milestone of the program will enable passengers travelling on Vistara flight UK864
from Bengaluru to Mumbai to utilize this process without presenting travel documents at every
touch point. This was made possible by the integration of Vistara’s Departure Control System
with the technology, allowing effortless processing at the entry to the terminal, passenger
security screening and the boarding gate. All Vistara flights are expected to be integrated into
the biometric boarding process at BLR Airport by October 2019.

Figure 16 The Digi Yatra Journey Concept

Based on Indian Policy about Digi Yatra. We found the lesson learned for implementing One
ID Concept. Considering growth forecast in Indian aviation, passenger journey improvement,
the cost of Infrastructure and the impact on the speed and efficiency of passenger processes, a
key initiative to re-imagine air travel in India The Indian Ministry of Civil Aviation (MoCA)
has taken. Looking beyond the conventional “build a bigger airport to manage more

26
passengers” to find innovative and cutting edge technology for improvement and cost effective
solutions. The "DIGI Yatra" initiative aims to provide a seamless, hassle-free passenger
service process and paperless travel experience for passengers flying through airports in India.
Using latest Identity Management and biometric recognition technologies, aiming to simplify
the Passenger processes at various check points in the Airport passenger processing.
The MoCA, has constituted a Technical Working Committee (TWC) consisting of Subject
Matter Experts (SME) from a few of the major airports in India and AAI. The TWC under the
Digital Cell of Digi Yatra has been working for the past year on the Digi Yatra Project and
have done trials at some of the leading airports in India to find out the best possible solution
that can be implemented by all the airports in India. After several workshops and deliberations
with aviation stakeholders and regulators, the Digi Yatra Process was documented by the TWC
and submitted to MoCA for circulating as a National Policy.
Passengers will no longer need to show their tickets/ boarding passes and their physical ID at
many of the check points at the airport, since the ticket/ boarding Pass is integrated with the
ID, faster processing times and simpler processes could be achieved.
Indian Government has set Digi Yatra Policy goals as these below:
1. Set the standards & standard operating procedures (SOPs) for Digital
Transformation of the Indian Aviation Industry.
2. Create a common “Digi Yatra” Identity management system with “Digital Identities”
like AADHAAR, Passport & Others, enabling Biometric Boarding Process for All
Airports (Tier 1, 2 & 3) across India.
The common Digi Yatra Platform will be built by a joint venture company (JVC) or
special purpose vehicle (SPV) under the Section 25 of the Companies Act 1956 that
will be established by the AAI and the five major airport operators in India.
3. Monitor and manage a time bound system rollout by all airlines, online travel agents,
global distribution systems & airports.
4. Conduct mass communication, marketing & awareness campaign for the new
standards through social media, TV and newspapers.
Target users of Digi Yatra are all passengers at any airport in India, be it Indian citizens (with
or without Digi Yatra ID) or foreign nationals. Also, the process shall simplify & ease the
passenger process equally for different passenger types like first time and frequent flyers in
India, group travelers and families, and foreign citizens or tourists.

2.5.2. Stakeholder Analysis

Stakeholder analysis is the process of assessing a system and potential changes to it as they
relate to relevant and interested parties. This information is used to assess how the interests of
those stakeholders should be addressed in a project plan, policy, program, or other action
(Ketema, Chisholm, & Enright, 2017). Stakeholder analysis is a key part of stakeholder
27
management. A stakeholder analysis of an issue consists of weighing and balancing all the
competing demands on a firm by each of those who have a claim on it, in order to arrive at the
firm's obligation in a particular case. A stakeholder analysis does not preclude the interests of
the stakeholders overriding the interests of the other stakeholders affected, but it ensures that
all affected will be considered (DeGeorge, 2010).
Types of stakeholders include: (De Mascia, 2016)
a. Primary stakeholders: those ultimately most affected, either positively or negatively
by an action.
b. Secondary stakeholders: the "intermesh (PMS) diaries," that is, persons or
organizations who are indirectly affected by an organization's actions.
c. Tertiary stakeholders: those who will be impacted the least.
d. Key stakeholders: those with significant influence upon or importance within an
organization; can also belong to the other groups.

Table 6 Stakeholder Mapping for One ID Initiative

Stakeholder Impact Influence What is How could the How could the Strategy for
Name How much How much important to stakeholder stakeholder engaging the
does the influence do the contribute to block the stakeholder
project they have stakeholder? the project? project?
impact them over the
project
AP2 (Service Medium Medium Improve Create Service Can’t define the Service
and Customer Blueprint and Blueprint and Science
Operation Experience SLA/SLG SLA/ SLG Management
Directorate) and between Can’t define the &
Operational Stakeholder, KSF Engineering
Efficiency Define the Key process
Success Factor Do the
Performance
Management
System design
Airlines High Medium Identity check Give the Can’t cooperate Create
match prerequisites involvement
between passenger data in Value co-
document and creation
biometric
Ground High Medium Identity check Do all SLA/ Can’t cooperate Create
Handling match SLG involvement
Agent between in Value co-
document and creation
biometric
Directorate High High Compliance Govern the Create the Create
General of with regulation for wrong involvement
Civil regulation Single Travel regulation in Value co-
Aviation Token creation
(DGCA)
IATA Medium Medium One ID Initiator of One - Create
concept could ID Concept involvement
be in Value co-
implemented creation
Hardware & High High Get project Supply the best Doesn’t have Find the best
Software device and right equipment supplier
Supplier software that for Facial
support Facial Recognition
28
 Recognition

Figure 17 Stakeholder Interest Matrix

Based on the matrix AP2 should maintain the key player. Because the key player can make or
break the success of a project. Even if all the deliverables are met and the objectives are
satisfied, if they aren’t happy, nobody’s happy (Watt, 2014).

2.6. Root Cause Analysis

Processes that are performed systematically in order to help to find out the causes of events or
factors that can inflict harm called as the root cause analysis. By knowing the better cause of
the occurrence or the cause of loss factors then can be further prepared corrective action of the
problem that occurs (compliancepanel, 2017).
To be able to identify possible causes and classify ideas that appear in useful categories, we
can use the cause and effect diagrams often referred to as Fishbone. To describe the cause and
effect conditions then use the Fishbone Diagram which is a structured approach in
brainstorming the cause of the problem. The head or mouth of the fish is used as the place
where problems occur (effects result). Some categories of causes form fish bone images with
derivative activities that can contribute to the cause of the problem. By involving some who
know well about a process or system that is subject to problems, then we can compile
categories and look for alternative causes for later illustrated in the Fishbone diagram.

29
On this thesis we develop the root cause analysis for AP2 as below diagram.

Figure 18 Root Cause Analysis on One ID Initiative

Table 7 Root Cause Analysis

No Factor Causes Root Causes Category Responsibility

1 Plant/ Airline high cost. Cost uncontrol factor AP2
Technology Who will absorb consideration
the cost?
2 People Not involved from Lack of Control factor AP2
beginning Collaboration
3 Policies No regulation for Regulation issues Uncontrol factor Government
Data Privacy (DGCA, DGPCR)
Until now not all
Indonesian has e-
KTP (ID)
4 Procedures Airline need to Different Uncontrol factor Airline
check ID and objectives
Boarding pass

From Table 7 Root Cause Analysis, factors that contribute on cannot onboard successfully
other stakeholders on one initiative come from policies, procedures, people and plants/
technology. This research focused on factor that controllable from the factor categories.

30
 Chapter III
Business Solution

Based on Chapter II, point 2.3.4. Data Analysis and point 2.6. Root Cause Analysis,
stakeholder collaboration is the most important thing from stakeholder’s perspective. Then
AP2 should compromising other stakeholder’s involvement in the initiative.
Based on the results of observations and results of FGD, we can describe the relationship value
between stakeholders in the airport as the following figure.

Figure 19 One ID value network

AP2 as the central of the value network will maintain multi stakeholder’s relationship. There
are 3 direct relationships from the One ID initiative: Government, Airlines, and Provider.
Aviation security is the part of AP2 internally. Airlines are representing ground handling agent
and passengers. The provider of hardware and software must be able to integrate with the DCS
provider in terms of exchange of transaction data in One ID.
In terms of collaboration on aviation regulations, civil record from E-KTP and data integration
with immigration, AP2 must be able to organise all three government agencies related to One
ID initiative. The Ministry of Transportation has a crucial role in the adjustment of aviation
31
regulations, especially relating to the use of biometric recognition as a substitute for boarding
pass and identity. DGCPR Ministry also plays a role in coordinating the use of identity data
from E-KTP which will be the main source in the enrolment process at the beginning of
passenger processing. And also, the Ministry of Law and Defence, which overtakes the
Directorate General of Immigration, plays a role in the process of integrating passport data
that will be tied with facial recognition.

3.1. Value Co-creation Process

Value co-creation is an interaction between the provider and customer in an active and creative
social process. The initiative came from the provider to generate value for customers (Kijima,
Translational System Sciences 2, 2015). The four phases of Value Co-creation could be drawn
as this figure:

Figure 20 Four-phase value co-creation process model

The first two phases, co-experience and co-definition, are relatively short-range concepts for
describing service appreciation, while the final two phases, co-elevation and co-development,
refer to the long-range activities necessary for service innovation.
In order to create One ID as the new service value, customers (represented by Airlines and
Ground Handling) and providers (as AP2 with other stakeholders) first co-experience the
service process, then co-define a shared internal model through mutual understanding among
them. To innovate service value, its co-elevation and co-development by the both sides is
critical.
In co-experience process, customers need to understand how to use One ID and its process,
meanwhile, AP2 as provider need to provide change management to fulfil customers need
alongside with other airport stakeholders. Some of the change management program namely:
FGD, workshops, coffee morning, etc.

32
Co-definition is a process where AP2 as provider and customer define together about the
service to be produced/ shared agreement. The best form of agreement should be written as
Cooperation Agreement.
Co-elevation is a zigzag-shaped spiral up process of expectation of the customers and abilities
of the providers. Keith Ferrazzi, the Chairman of New York Times stated that around the
networks and the relationships, we need to redefine the actual contract of working together
from collaborating to co-elevating. This implies we’re not just cooperating; we’re making a
pledge to one another to go higher; to take each other to an increasingly raised level. This, and
this alone, will allow us to exceed shareholder expectations through our interdependency
management (Ferrazzi, 2018). For example, airline create promotion collaborating with airport
to educate passengers on new One ID initiative that will be held soon. Also, the ground
handling agent should be trained their front liner on training program of One ID Biometric
Self Service in AP2 airport gradually.
Co-development pays attention to co-innovation generated by simultaneous collaboration
among the various entities. AP2 must conduct regular meetings and conduct periodic
evaluations with the stakeholders involved in the One-ID initiative. To control the meeting
process can be established a mutually agreed Project Management Office.

3.2. Value Orchestration Platform

Value orchestration platform involving customers and providers to be on the same plane and
facilitates the process and leaves the control entirely to providers and sometimes to customers
as well. In order to facilitate the value co-creation process, we need a platform to orchestrate
the program which purposed to realize the implementation of One ID in CGK Airport.

Figure 21 Value Orchestration Platform of One ID Initiative

33
Before defining the management strategies, we should consider that every program should
have: Goals, a strategic result that will be achieved/ produced by the institution. Goals must
be realistic and achievable. Indicator, a quantitative measure describing the level of
achievement of strategic objectives. Target, a terms and conditions set forth to be achieved.
Initiative, a long-term step to achieve goals/ strategies/ programs.
There are three management strategies for creating Value Orchestration Platform that consist
of:

a. Involvement Program
Involvement strategy is a strategy for the platform to attract and involve customers and
providers. In this strategy, inviting customer to co-experience & co-definition is very
important. To promote One ID, AP2 need to make the platform through programs with
stakeholder involvement since the beginning of initiative.

Table 8 Involvement Program

co-experience & Detail Program

co-definition Goals Indicator Target Initiative
activities
Stakeholder To gather The meeting will Will be held AP2 as orchestrator
involvement on stakeholders in order be attended by all minimum twice in has initiatives to
One ID to reach agreement stakeholders or a year organize the Coffee
Initiative on the better their morning.
transformation of representatives,
passenger journey and there is an
processing. Also act agreement.
as the Steering
Committee.
Forming To define steps, Document of steps One review every 4 AP2 as orchestrator
Working Group review and develop and months has initiatives to
recommendation on recommendation organize the working
One ID Initiative group supported by
DGCA and IATA

b. Curation Program
Curation strategy to promote One ID value curation is essential for the platform to
encourage customers and providers to co-elevate and co-develop. Each party should
interpret or develop new value of services and assess the result together.

34
 Table 9 Curation Program

co-development Detail Program

& co-elevation Goals Indicator Target Initiative
activities
e-KTP e-KTP data could be Valid e-KTP data Passengers will no AP2, airlines, system
activation as bind with biometric recognized by longer need to provider work
source of ID face recognition on enrolment kiosk show their tickets/ together with
enrolment kiosk. scanner. boarding passes DGCPR for e-KTP
and their physical integration.
Identity cards at
many of the check
points at the
Airport.
Regulatory Addendum of before first release AP2, airlines, system
creation of regulation on DGCA for One ID provider work
Biometric implementation at together with DGCA
recognition airport for addendum of
regulation.

c. Empowerment Program
Empowerment strategy to promote One ID. Strategies how to promote co-elevation
processes (customer and provider improve their competence) and co-development
(customer do the feedback and provider learning to respond).

Table 10 Empowerment Program

co-development Detail Program

& co-elevation Goals Indicator Target Initiative
activities
Conduct mass Campaign for the Awareness of Every month AP2 and airlines cooperate to
communication, new standards people. since coffee marketing & awareness
marketing & through social morning, then program.
awareness media, TV and every week
newspapers prior to first roll
out.
Create SLA Create same Implementing Each airline has AP2, airlines and ground
and SOP for understanding and SLA and SOP SLA and SOP. handling agent working
One ID procedure on One together to maintain the
ID. implementation of SLA and
SOP.
35
3.3. Solution Analysis
3.3.1. Stakeholder Involvement and Organization
Project can be a success when stakeholders are involved in the early stage and properly
managed during implementation. On per project basis, there are four key phases of project
which AP2 should mind in implementing One ID initiative.
1. Pre-project
a. Introduce project idea early to all relevant stakeholders and identify source of
funding. Potentially start with Proof of Concept (POC) first as exploratory
approach to solve operational issue. Additionally, it is also important to the
member of project team and impacted operational team to identify Key
Success Factor (KSF).
b. With regards to external stakeholders, AP2 should communicate what issues/
problem on which the project is trying to solve and the benefits to all parties.
AP2 and external stakeholders can identify solutions and solution provider
together to build culture of openness and trust.
2. Beginning of project
To ensure the completion in timely manner and within budget, it is recommended
to put together Project Management Office (PMO) relevant to the project. In this
case, PMO should consists of relevant team to operations, infrastructure, service,
IT, etc. who have the expertise in the topic. Additionally, it is also important to
form PMO team consisting of both internal and external i.e. representative of
stakeholders.
3. During project
a. Key important activities during the project are:
b. Monitoring and control of project and stakeholder engagement.
c. Continuously monitor project Key Success Factor (KSF).
d. Regular update session.
e. Management of conflict/ issue/ problem/ etc.
f. Iteratively identify project risk and decide on mitigation/ recovery plan during
the project.
g. Clarify/ modify Business Continuity Plan (BCP).
4. Project finalization
Conduct pre final assessment on project KSF together with steering committee
involving operational team in the testing and trial from relevant stakeholders’ team
as well as document and share learning from the project
To get successful One ID initiatives, effective stakeholder engagement should be prioritized.
Stakeholder engagement is a commitment to inclusivity, which is giving stakeholders the right
to be heard and accepting the obligation to account to them.
36
Effective stakeholder engagement will improve the understanding between airport operators,
stakeholders and business environment with better management of risk and reputation. With
trust-based relationships, decisions and actions that have impact on the companies will use the
pooling of resources (knowledge, people, money and technology) for joint problem solving.
Those activities will contribute to more equitable and sustainable development by giving those
who have a right to be heard the opportunity to be heard.
Commitment of stakeholders begins with communication; from the top management level, to
operational team members. Ensuring that vision is not selfish is also important, meaning that
the vision should cover the success of relevant stakeholders and not only the airport itself.
Some of leading airports in the world engage relevant stakeholders even before the project
started.
New department specifically dedicated for the implementation is deemed unnecessary, instead
AP2 should form working group consisting of internal representatives as well as external
stakeholders’ representatives. Having said that, it is also important for AP2 to have small
number of new hires to support the implementation.

3.3.2. Proposed Working Group on One ID Initiative

Working group is recommended to create as an independent steering and project committees
with regular reviews to execute One ID initiatives for three main reasons:
1. Shared vision in achieving key interests of all stakeholders are catered therefore
driving airport ecosystem forward as a whole.
2. Hands on understanding of AP2 and its airport environments, therefore, will be able
to provide actionable and practical input during the implementations.
3. Ability to gain support from airport and ground operation teams, which means buy-
in from the operational staffs, removing unnecessary resistance and bringing sense
of belonging from the users or passenger service team, amongst other benefits.

37
 Table 11 Working Group for One ID Initiative

No. Organization structure Description

1. Sponsor Board CEO level from AP2 and Stakeholders like DGCA, IATA,
Airlines, GHA.
2. Steering Committee EVP level (including CxO) from each stakeholder
Review of performance, progress and budget, etc.
3. Central PMO Project leadership consist of:
4. Branch PMO Relevant AP2 corporate such as Operations, IT, AOCC,
Services, etc. and branch’s EGM.
External stakeholders such as VPs of airlines, ground handlers,
etc.
5. Task Force for One ID Task force is on the ground team whom directly supervise day-
to-day progress.
Can be split into smaller tasks at each airport.
Collect and document key learnings for future implementation
at another airport.

Sponsor board acts as the owner of initiatives. Sponsor board should consist of senior
executive, i.e. director level, from each of internal and external corporate office. The members
of sponsor board should agree on vision, objective, benefits, associated risks as well as funding
source related to the project.
AP2 also recommended to form a steering committee consisting of relevant AP2 executives
such as EVP though may also include director level. The task of the steering committee is to
ensure that communication, benefit, and risks are shared in all fairness. Additionally, steering
committee should also review the performance, progress as well as budget related with the
initiatives. Steering committee should assign representatives from their respected organization
to conduct project management activities.
Corporate team such as Operations, IT, AOCC, etc. and external stakeholders’ team members
such as VPs of airlines, ground handlers, etc. should be part of central project management
office (CPMO). The job of CPMO is close monitoring One ID program executions from
helicopter view, safeguarding overall timeline and communication with steering committee.
CPMO works closely with branch airport executive i.e. GM to drive per airport project
implementation. Branch GMs are part of CPMO though has stronger focus on their respective
airports hence branch PMO for branch level implementation. Some of relevant CPMO team
should also be involved in branch PMO. Both CPMO and branch PMO take the role of project
leadership in One ID Initiative implementation.
Day to day execution is done by task force, consisting of a more junior staff, from both internal
and external stakeholders, who is likely to have most relevant day to day operational
knowledge and awareness to branch specific situation. Task force is on the ground team whom
38
directly supervise day-to-day progress and can be split into smaller tasks, also collects and
documents key learnings for future implementation at other airports.
Communication and reporting should be conducted in a regular basis however to varying
degree of frequency between the different levels of working groups.

3.3.3. Proposed Service Blueprint for One ID Initiative

Figure 22 Proposed Passenger Processing with One ID

Based on the results of the benchmark, FGD and the interview conducted earlier, this thesis
proposed the Service Blueprint model as above. The first initial phase on One ID is enrolment.
At CGK airport, we proposed enrolment kiosk as the point of contact for passenger to enrol
their boarding pass, e-KTP (ID card) and their face. The initial data from enrolment will be
the single source of truth that will be used in subsequent processes. No longer need to show
the boarding pass and ID in many times.
Of course, this cannot be done for all passengers. because there are several types of passengers
who may not be allowed to do the enrolment such as children under 17 years old, because they
do not yet have an e-KTP (ID), and people with special needs or Passengers with Reduced
Mobility (PRM). Those type of passengers maybe need different policies from stakeholder’s
collaboration in order to make everyone could use the seamless One ID initiative.

39
 Chapter IV
Conclusion and Implementation

4.1. Conclusion
According to the previous chapters, the conclusion for business issue on One ID
implementation is AP2 should compromising other stakeholder’s involvement in the initiative.
Then AP2 should managing the process to involving them on best orchestration based on
service science approach.
The creation of value co-creation requires a great effort from all parties involved. The parties
involved must think what is desired as the output of the established cooperative relationship.
The need for trust in the government that airport managers will not misuse information
provided or not to unilaterally exploit such cooperation. Airport managers must actively
manage and explore the expectations of stakeholders about what they want. These
considerations bring the idea of service that is dynamic with the process of interaction, learning
from each other and collaborating by exchanging experiences.
In this research, we use model value co-creation process and value orchestration platform as a
hierarchical service by using service science perspective. We first examine and express the
situation from Airport Passenger Processing in CGK Airport by using qualitative approach.
Then, we analyse a process model of value co-creation consisting of four phases, i.e., co-
experience, co-definition, co-elevation and co-development. The model describes interactive
relationship among stakeholders in Airport by involving value co-creation process to
supporting such collaboration. Then we apply three management strategies of value
orchestration platform for orchestrating value co-creation process, i.e., involvement, curation
and empowerment strategies.
We also offer to set up a project management team by AP2 that will become a collaborative
platform for stakeholders in the One ID Initiative.

4.2. Implementation Plan and Recommendation

Implementation plan activities are the implementation process of work program on action
plans that will be implemented on AP2 One ID Initiative. At this thesis, author suggest creation
of Project Management Office with review process on regular schedule.
Below is an example of implementation schedule.

Table 12 One ID Initiative Project Timeline

No. Action Taken Remark 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

1. Engage with stakeholder
Creation of Sponsor Board At the beginning
Creation of Steering Committee At the beginning

40
 Creation of PMO At the beginning
Creation of Task Force At the beginning
2. Detail Planning
3. Design and PoC
4. Roll out
5. Evaluation
Evaluation from Sponsor Board Every 6 months
Evaluation from Steering Committee Every 3 months
Evaluation from PMO Every 1 month
Evaluation from Task Force Every 2 weeks
6. Closing & Lesson learned At the end

Stakeholders’ management and orchestration is an important and critical aspect to succeed in

implementing One ID initiative. In fact, efforts should start before technology implementation
and pursued according to the stage of implementation.
The preparation phase is very important and should be well planned and thoroughly. In order
to get the different stakeholders on board, AP2 has to think and draft a shared vision. A shared
vision consists of the ambition of the initiatives, how a certain initiative fits with the different
parties’ long-term strategy and ambition and the benefits that each party will draw from it.
Once completed, AP2 has to think about the engagement strategy, engagement objective and
engagement scope while making sure that they have the leadership’s commitment and support.
On a more practical way, AP2 should organize internal workshops with the relevant experts
and including top management to determine engagement strategy and objective. On the main
time, they should identify key interlocutors in their counterpart and assign a person to develop
and manage relationship starting with casual conversation before getting into serious topics.
Sponsor board are needed to be the first meeting to be executed on purpose for mutual
understanding between stakeholders. They need to define the mutual objectives and negotiate
the benefit will be collected on One ID initiative.
After the Sponsor Board meeting, the establishment of a steering committee was made up of
various stakeholder representatives. The Steering Committee acts as a supervisor for the
Project Management Office (PMO) established by AP2. The PMO will lead task force as the
implementor.
On the rollout phase, AP2, Airlines and Ground Handling should agree to sign a Service Level
Agreement (SLA) including specific KPI to measure performance that need to be achieved
and maintained.
For data collection, AP2 should agree with stakeholder on key data to be collected based on
the KPIs to be monitored. For information provision, AP2 should establish in collaboration
with stakeholder business rules for data sharing and info provision among different
stakeholders in order to ensure them that their data will not be misused or leaked.
On the Evaluation Phase, AP2 must issue report with KPI established in SLA and circulate it
to different stakeholder in a transparent way. They should review performance and SLA on a
regular basis e.g. weekly, monthly, etc. with a beforehand determined steering committee. This
review will allow pinpointing issues, areas for improvement and best practices to be spread.
41
 Bibliography

atlan.com. (2019). 3 qualitative research methods. Retrieved from Humans of Data - Atlan:
https://humansofdata.atlan.com/2018/03/3-qualitative-research-methods/
compliancepanel. (2017, May). compliancepanel.blogspot.com. Retrieved from
www.blogspot.com: http://onlinecompliancepanel.blogspot.com/2017/05/preparing-
proactive-root-cause-analysis.html
De Mascia, S. (2016). Project Psychology: Using Psychological Models and Techniques to
Create a Successful Project. CRC Press. CRC Press.
DeGeorge, R. (2010). Business Ethics. Pearson Education, Inc.
Ferrazzi, K. (2018, July 24). ferrazzigreenlight. Retrieved from
http://ferrazzigreenlight.com/insights/one-word-will-reshape-entire-organization/
IATA. (2018). One ID Concept Paper - Version 1. International Air Transport Association.
ISO, I. O. (2012). ISO 21500, Guidance on Project Management. Switzerland: ISO.
Ketema, D. M., Chisholm, N., & Enright, P. (2017). Chapter 20: Examining the
Characteristics of Stakeholders in Lake Tana Sub-basin Resource Use, Management
and Governance. Springer.
Kijima, K. (2015). Translational System Sciences 2. In Service Systems Science. Japan:
Springer.
Kijima, K., & Arai, Y. (2016). Value Co-Creation Process and Value Orchestration Platform.
In S. K. al, Global Perspectives on Service Science: Japan (p. 144). New York:
Springer.
Ng, I., & Maul, R. (2011). Embedding the New Discipline of Service Science. In The
Science of Service Systems. Springer, Boston, MA.
PT Angkasa Pura II (Persero). (2017). CEO Message 43. Tangerang: AP2.
Spohrer, J., Demirkan, H., & Lyons, K. (2015). Social Value: A Service Science Perspective.
In K. Kijima, Service Systems Science. Japan: Springer.
Vision Box. (2019). Retrieved from www.vision-box.com: https://www.vision-
box.com/pressroom/press-releases/digi-yatra-seamless-flow-goes-live-at-blr-airport
Watt, A. (2014). Project Management. Blackwell Science.
wikipedia.org. (2009). Retrieved from Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_science,_management_and_engineering

42
 Appendices

FGD Report

43