The novel coronavirus COVID 19) outbreak brought a massive drop in air traffic. The limited number of flights and travelers caused tremendous financial loss to the Muscat Airport and other airports in the Middle East. Thus, the Airport operated a limited number of passenger flights and cargo flights. All aspects of social, economic, and operational dimensions suffered significant disruptions. The resulting crisis in the dramatic change in mobility, travel, grounding of aircraft, and trade disruptions required crisis management responses. Also, the resulting crisis forced decision-makers in different airports worldwide to face challenges that included mitigating the impacts of disruptions on social and organizational practices. Muscat International Airport instituted different crisis management approaches to respond to the shocks and disruptions caused by COVID 19. Different airports around the world implemented various policies and frameworks for crisis management. Comparing Muscat International Airport with Abu Dhabi International Airport’s recovery process and crisis management efforts will depict the measures to prevent reputational, economic, operational, and business losses.
Current Recovery Strategies for Muscat Airport
COVID 19 Crisis
The resurgence of the COVID 19 created increasing uncertainty in several sectors. The Airports Council International (ACI) published its eighth quarterly assessment revealing different impacts of the pandemic on the airports’ management and operations (Dube, Nhamo, and Chikodzi, 2021). When the World Health Organization declared COVID 19 outbreak in 2020, life as people knew it changed. According to Oman’s Airport Annual Report (2020), Muscat Airport rolled out a health, safety, and environmental campaign to recover from the losses occasioned by COVID 19. The strict safeguards guaranteed the recovery procedure to protect airport users, passengers and employees. The Airport established a social distance protocol by recommending virtual meetings. The Civil Aviation Authority created a guide for its passengers traveling through different airports in Oman. Therefore, Muscat International Airport set up COID 19 testing station and conducted technical tests to assess the strength and integrity of the taxiway and runway.
COVID 19 outbreak negatively affected all spheres of human life (Al Eid & Arnout, 2020). The public health scare contributed to the government imposing lockdowns on the airspaces. Given that the pandemic had begun in Wuhan, China, it escalated to become a global crisis that forced airports to consider unprecedented efforts to manage the catastrophe. Alves et al. (2020) indicated that as of May 2020, COVID 19 had affected over 213 counties. The virus had spread, infecting over 551 677 people worldwide, with 347,944 having died from the pandemic (Alves et al., 2020). These statistics paint a dire picture of the overall impact of covid and the fear and helplessness it caused in several spheres of life. Research indicates that the emerging uncertainty further worsened the situation allowing the aviation business to rebound at a slower pace (Serrano & Kazda, 2020). COVID 19 pandemic brought a V-shape and U-shape recovery effort focusing on the international civil aviation organizations (Serrano & Kazda, 2020). As a result, the airlines grounded the places, contributing to over 70 per cent of operations scaled-down in multiple large airlines. Globally, around sixty per cent of the global fleet ceased operations from April 2020. In efforts to support the sinking capacities and address the reducing revenues, the International Air Transport Association (IATA) asked the European governments to offer relief to airlines. The effort to respond in sustaining operations depends on the cost control strategies, restoring the revenue streams and integration innovation to accommodate variable demand and capacity of passengers during the post-COVID 19 (Olaganathan, 2021). The future of the aviation sectors, airports, and airlines depend on the effective crisis management that was in place.
Muscat International Airport used public relations in crisis management. The Airport allowed all non-professional staff to work from home. Crisis management strategies are methods that respond to significant adverse events. The unpredictable event that occurred because of the COVID 19 pandemic triggered decisions that would limit the damage to the organization. Research indicates that the crisis management approaches seek to minimize the damage that the COVID 19 pandemic caused. Muscat International Airport developed comprehensive processes that dealt with unexpected and sudden disruptions. The Airport’s authority sent internal emails to all staff informing them of regular updates. It also utilized the social media pages t to update the public on any updates on the recovery process. Also, the Airport established a hotline phone number for staff to address any emerging issues. The recovery strategy aimed to spread the message and ensure quality media coverage for all events. Thus, it raised awareness among customers and society by communicating the up-to-date preventive measures, recovery efforts, and plans (Oman Observer, 2020). For this reason, Muscat International Airline embarked on organizational efforts that involved a cost reduction approach. The device was part of the response strategy that reduced operational costs across the airport terminals and used low-volume air traffic to ensure the safety of the aircraft.
Muscat International Airport prepared its employees and other stakeholders to face the adverse conditions with determination and courage. In modern days, crisis management embodies an imperative approach to organizational performance. The magnitude of preparedness informs the effectives of crisis management. According to Seth et al. (2018), the concerns of unpredictable and rare occurrences reveal that crisis management involves direct actions to respond, evaluate and mitigate events of the crisis levels. These actions coalesce around the intervention efforts between the stages of crisis escalation and cascading the impacts of the crisis. For this reason, crisis management is a critical component of organizational management. Every day manifests diverse levels of crisis. Therefore, adopting a practical framework of crisis management depends on the ability of an organization to develop an action plan that reflects a general framework of crisis management.
Point-Point Model
Initially, Muscat International Airport was a hub and spoke focusing o the distribution model in which a centralized hub existed. However, the airport has increased its number of terminals for the cargo section reinforcing efficient operations. With the emergency of the COVID 19 pandemic, Muscat Airport adopted a point-to-point transit allowing the plains to travel directly to a different destination without necessarily using the central hub. The same case is evident with Abu Dhabi International airport, which sought to accommodate passenger expectations and address the critics in the aviation sector (Curran, 2020). Both Muscat and Abu Dhabi International Airports embraced cost-saving measures that allowed flights to operate on marginal point-to-point routes. The airports would reduce the operating costs and preferred clearing airlines that would fly directly to their destination to limit the likelihood of spreading the COVIF 9 pandemic.
Given that the airports were not focusing on profitability, most airlines flew with few passengers on board. Muscat International Airport had flights operating directly from Muscat to their destination and ran a few flights from different airports across The Middle East with empty seats. The same case was evident in Abu Dhabi International Airport, which created a network of building profitability with few passengers in the new environment of the COVID 19 pandemic.
Crisis Management in Airports
Most airports used crisis communication to respond to the emergencies that emerged with COVID 19 pandemic. According to Klauser and Pauschinger (2022), airport managers formed crisis management teams to respond to the disruptions of COVID 19In the U.S, J. F Kennedy international AirPort developed an airport safety initiative to implement emergency procedures and minimize the social, financial, and health impacts. In Asia, Muscat International Airport established good communications collaboration with other stakeholders, maintained its schedules, and reduced operations costs. In Europe, Brussels Airport issued inter-team communication, initial alerts and public communication as part of the crisis management during and after the COVID 19 pandemic.
Most airports used leadership competencies. This helped Muscat International Airport to turn the threats of COVID 19 into the impetus for progress and innovations. The Airport builds on its achievement to play a proactive role in addressing the disruptions caused by the spread of COVID 19 (Aro-Gordon et al., n.d). From mid-March to April 2020, Muscat International Airport closed all its coordinated international passenger traffic and asked its staff to work from home. The response was to prevent the spread of COVID 19. It also started an action list to track its stakeholders’ readiness for the resumption of operations (Al Ghafri et al., 2021). As part of the recovery plan, the Airport established a working group to manage the recovery process among all its stakeholders jointly. Airport management relied on leadership competencies to propose dimensions of crisis management. Stages of crisis management depend on the ability of a leader to embrace a crisis-prone culture and utilize leadership competencies that help the organization reflect on its practices (Bhaduri, 2018). Since contemporary organizations operate in extreme uncertainties such as natural calamities and epidemics like COVID 19, leadership becomes an essential factor. The underlying reason is that crises disrupt the discontinuous external and internal environment.
Regulatory Contribution
Crisis events that arise from the external conditions require leadership competitive to immunize the negative impacts of the crisis and leverage the crisis to the organization’s advantage. Therefore, Muscat International Airport followed the guidelines of regulatory organizations such as Airport Health Accreditation and Airport Council International. These bodies developed the airport’s operational performance to enhance the effective response. In the last quarter of 2020, the civil authority established the Civil Aviation Taskforce for Operations Recovery, which bound Muscat International Airport on travel guidelines, health, safety, and environment patrols, and quarantine guidelines (Oman’s Airport Annual Report, 2020). The Airport coordinated with relevant authorities to launch a COVID 19 retail policy as a standard reference for its commercial operations. The Airport worked with the Civil Aviation Authority to produce the COVID 19 Aviation Health Safety Protocol that coordinated the operations of some repatriation flights during the closure of the airports. Leaders need to embrace consistent stakeholder involvement and communication strategies at every crisis stage for these reasons. Bhaduri (2019) proposes that the five elements in crisis management include human forces, organizational culture, top management resilience, and technological input.
The primary recovery strategy for Muscat International Airport was developing airside safety and enhancing capacity and efficiency by minimizing the impacts on the changes in boarding, cabin cleaning process and overall terminal efficiency and passenger flow. The airport established risk assessment mechanisms to address the air traffic volumes and protect ground handlers. On the other hand, Abi Dhabi International Airport utilized passenger demand simulation to passenger the flow of passengers and reduce overcrowding in the waiting areas (Le and Phi, 2019). The restart of the scheduled passenger flights was through Airport’s Emergency operations. This ensured that the facilities, staff, systems, and processes worked as outlined. Muscat International Airport prepared a comprehensive recovery plan that encouraged communication and crisis management to resume operations and coordinate service delivery. The Airport continued to reinforce the coordination mechanism in the recovery phase (OECD, 2020). Although COVID 19 pandemic occasioned a long-lasting impact on the aviation sectors, leaders in several airports worldwide used their competencies to revise, innovate and transform their business models.
Comparing the Recovery Strategy
The recovery strategies of most airports informed the commitment to the guidelines of the Civil Aviation Authority. Both Muscat International Airport and Abu Dhabi International Airport focused on implementing the operational task force that supported the comprehensive health and safety measures. International Airport Review (2020) supported the findings from Oman Airport Annual Report 2020 by supporting global efforts to combat Covid 19. As a result, Abu Dhabi International Airport complied with the International Civil Aviation Authority to ensure secure, safe, and efficient emergency supplies and equipment transport. The efforts reflect the recovery strategy that Muscat International Airport employed in facilitating humanitarian flights and repatriation efforts during the lockdown period (Al Ghafri et al., 2021). In the initial phase of the pandemic, Abu Dhabi International Airport and Muscat International Airport facilitated a significant number of humanitarian and repatriation flights for the Emiratis and Oman citizens returning from different regions of the world. Both airports provided repatriation of foreign nationals and expatriates departing for their home countries. However, there is no exact data on the number of flights operated at Abu Dhabi International Airport to repatriate expatriates.
The similarities between Muscat and Abu Dhabi Airports’ recovery processes ensured that they addressed the health and safety of their passengers, stakeholders, and employees. Muscat airports and Abu Dhabi Airport coordinated with relevant authorities, suppliers, and partners to bolster the efforts for recovery. As a result, the airports protected public health and maintained the integrity of their operations. Both airports recognized the crisis in the aviation sector and the need for a multisectoral approach to developing the recovery process (Oman’s Airport Annual Report, 2020). The airports also continued their operations to provide consistent communication through different arrangements for the plans.
The difference that emerges in the recovery plans is in the execution of the programs. While Muscat International Airport built a more robust collaboration ecosystem, Abu Dhabi International airport responded to the crisis from a public health dimension. Muscat airport focused on reducing the cost of operation and introduced major operational channels such as consolidating terminals, closing concessions, and furloughing the staff. However, Abu Dhabi International Airport embraced a collective call for relief measures and built new success foundations through partnerships and collaborations.
Muscat International Airport applied the general framework for crisis management. While this allowed the Airport to provide substantial benefits in situations of significant crises, Abu Dhabi International Airport followed the guidelines of the public health agency. The considerable disease crisis challenges impacted airport infrastructure, necessitating the cross-cut crisis management contingency plan (Fung, Tsui, and Hon, 2020). Whereas Muscat International Airport understood a crisis management plan depended on the existing framework to enhance the institutions’ recovery, Abu Dhabi International Airport’s crisis response revealed the implementation of the Mitroff best practice model. This model demonstrates how organizations can effectively manage crises (Olaganathan, 2021). The potentially disruptive and unexpected crisis threatened the existence of airports and the aviation inducer affecting their performance and reputation.
The Efficiency of Covid-19 Immediate Measures
The efficiency of Muscat International Airport lies in establishing precautionary COVID 19 testing. The effort was to promote the health and safety of all the stakeholders, employees, and passengers. During the immediate crisis response, the robust set of precautionary measures included a thermal screening of passengers and staff and establishing free COVID 19 PCR testing for employees and passengers (Oman’s Airport Annual Report, 2020). A typical crisis response approach emerges from several airports in size and performance. Muscat International Airport and similar airports focused on complying with their respective Civil Aviation Authority guidelines to carry out a regular risk assessment and implement workforce cluster management in coordination with airlines operating from the individual airports (Oman Observer, 2020). Thus, the airports succeeded in enforcing social distance guidelines, implementing roster realign for ample staffing, and establishing frequent sterilization of workspaces and common areas through the distinct Airport facilities.
Mitroff Crisis Management Model
Most airports applied the Mitroff crisis management model as a general framework to optimize the crisis response. The model has significant aspects that include a clear contingency plan for crisis handling guidelines for different airports. Since the aviation sector operates on global rules and regulations, enhanced communication challenges amongst departments in IATA allowed for the effective sharing of crisis mitigation plans (Klauser & Pauschinger, 2020). Therefore, all the critical aspects and phases of crisis preparedness and response resonated with the coordinated and uniform approach to providing the parking bays for grounded airlines and engaging in measures to protect the Airport’s revenue, operations, infrastructure, and human factors.
The dimensions of Mitroff’s crisis management models allowed airport management organizations to detect the trails of early warning and recognize factors that would precede the crisis. According to Leta and Chan (2021), organizations engage in action plans and communications that systematically reduce the crisis, mitigate the impacts, and establish order after the crisis. The principle fits into the dimensions of the crisis management lifecycle and response framework that most airports use. Integrating the four-stage lifecycle of crisis management indicates why airports worldwide used a simplified model that outlined the guidelines for crisis response, prevention, planning, implementation, evaluation, and feedback. Thus, the airport management aligned their crisis management response to COVID 19 pandemic by planning the response, developing and executing a crisis management plan, and coordinating with relevant stakeholders to map the response strategies and mitigate the crisis (Olaganathan, 2021). In some regions, managers took recovery actions after the crisis. Notably, airports applied the Mitroff model by identifying the elements of general crisis management. Such a mechanism focused on assessing the risks and evaluating the response mitigation mechanisms, stakeholders, systems, and scenarios involved throughout the entire process of the crisis.
COVID 19 threatened the organizational goals of the airports in different regions. While the managers did not respond immediately, they created a platform for assessing the trends and responding appropriately. According to Serrano and Kazda (2020), COVID 19 pandemic necessitated the business failure. Many travelers could not trust the Airport’s decision to lift the lockdown. This exerted pressure on the management of airports and threatened the organizational value. Therefore, the airports were susceptible to the COVID 19 crisis because of the weak market positions, low preparedness, resource constraints, and high dependency on the World Health Organization and the government. Therefore, the airports suffered from the number of employees, cash flow issues, reduced sales volume, business closure, financial losses, and inability to meet their contractual obligations. Most airports did not have the option to maintain their operations and facilitate the movements of cargo flights and repatriation. While the airlines stopped flying due to the decrease in the demand of passengers, airports needed to support airlines by providing certain areas as new parking sections (IEA, 2020). The World Director General of Airport Council International released a media statement that proposed that the recovery of operations in the aviation industry would take up to two years to reach the pre-crisis traffic levels (Serrano & Kazda, 2020). Thus, the quick response reflected the global economic policy to protect the critical airport operations and the millions of jobs that rely on airport operations.
Crisis Management of Airports and Precautionary Plans
Comparative assessment reveals that many counties imported partial and total lockdown, affecting the operations in the airports. The health and safety of passengers, staff, and other stakeholders in the Air transport sector became the primary priority. Dube, lNhamo, and Chikodzi (2021) reiterate that airports sought to introduce significant biosafety and health measures that would consolidate the health and safety of passengers. For this reason, the airport customer experience reflected the changing expectations among the global population, thus addressing their concern (Serrano & Kazda, 2020). Although Muscat International Airport adopted a consolidated approach in partnering with the government to prepare for the restarting of global connectivity, the unprecedented efforts in global vaccinations provided hope for the return of normalcy. Besides, the COVID 19 pandemic brought airports worldwide to a halt. The second quarter of 2020 reported persuaded airport traffic, losses, and revenue decline.
Muscat International Airport and other airports in the Middle East used contraction, consolidation, and future consideration in their crisis management. When airports responded to the demand drop and reduction in revenue by avoiding direct operating costs, they communicated to all their stakeholders about their plans (Budda, Isona, and Adrienne, 2020). The COVID 19 crisis was characterized by unknown consequences with sudden and unexpected disruptions in the operations. As a result, the Airport communicated to its stakeholders the choices it undertook to accommodate the impacts and thus respond to the crisis (Kamil, 2020). According to Al-Debbagh (2020), the administrative approach developed a plan to address the challenges. The organizational difficulties mainly depicted the airlines’ ability to project the occurrence of the crisis, predicting the different scenarios that would emerge and examining the weakness in the system that may appear during the period of the crisis. The necessity to prepare a crisis management plan occurred at the macro level of most airports of the same size and performance as Muscat International Airport (Park, 2021). Different airports in different counties developed a crisis response strategy by highlighting the critical priorities in the scope of the crisis. In Saudi Arabia and the larger Middle East, airports detect principle social issues and decide by developing a public communication policy. The implication of the macro-level crisis response fostered the leadership policy for handling the crisis. The best practices from Saudi Arabia included aligning the organizational culture, framework preparation, and establishing an airport crisis response system.
Similarity to European Model
The leadership competencies are similar to the European and Middle Eat model of responding to the crisis. Leaders of various airports in the two regions relinquished the belief that top-down communication would promise stability. Therefore, the airports undertook routine emergencies and relied on their control and command structure to manage operations. The scripted response depended on leaders organizing their organizations, setting clear crisis priorities, and empowering stakeholders with information (Park, 2021). Therefore, leaders organized a network of teams to promote rapid problem solving and diffuse tension, chaotic conditions, and stress among leaders. The network of teams consisted of highly adaptable groups that worked together to enhance collaboration among teams. Leaders approached the crisis positively and guided their airports in ensuring that they managed all communication processes while upholding the organizational reputation (Choi, 2021). The central aim of the crisis management involved the airports developing the necessary system to minimize the impacts of the COVID 19 pandemic and enhance the organizational resilience.
Airports relied on IATA and different airports authority to form an emergency and management task force. The agency targeted tracking the evolution and trends of the COVID 19 pandemics whale implementing appropriate measures to curb its spread (Choi, 2021). Therefore, some of the actions these organizations adopted aligned with the public health protocols of social distancing and closure of airports to passenger airlines. The airports implemented guidelines that limited person-to-person transmission in public places. When WHO declared COVID 19 a global pandemic, airport management developed stringent measures that included suspending passenger and transit flights and providing particular wings for the airplanes to park (Kamil, 2020). The rational crisis management across different airports indicates a comparative policy approach that focuses on ensuring the safety of the staff and the general public. The overall communication and crisis management plan allowed the Dubai Airports Corporations to instruct the passengers on the changes in travel behavior. Both Muscat and Abu Dhabi International Airports recognize that harmonizing the connectivity of airlines in different parts of the world is IATA’s success. Therefore, the airports implement the rules and regulations from IATA. The response to government protocols and airport strategies determined the difference in the numbers from both Muscat International Airport and Abu Dhabi International Airport.
Strategies to Enhance the Current Situation
Proactive Approach
Muscat International Airport and Abu Dhabi International Airport implemented a proactive approach to the COVID 19 crisis management. The system enhanced the existing situation by helping the two airports develop tools to meet human needs. According to Ganghofer (2021), most airports across the world adapted quickly to the prevailing circumstances. Crisis management aims at defining the crisis and limiting the risks as early as possible. As a result, Muscat International Airport, just like Abu Dhabi International Airport, elaborated strategies to limit the damage that COVID 19 had done.
The aviation industry adopted health and safety protocols to mitigate the spread of COVID 19. Dube, lNhamo, and Chikodzi (2021) revealed that the pandemic inflicted a heavy toll that resulted in the bankruptcy of several airports and airlines, rating downgrades, and liquidation due to the severe cash burnout instigated by the travel restrictions. Several factors demonstrated the vulnerability of airport management to the pandemics, such as Influenzas H5N1. Irrespective of this vulnerability to different shocks, the capacity of airports and the resilience to address the crisis reveals the crisis management strategy. Although the aviation sector suffered the worst effects caused by the COVID 19, it played a leading role in spreading the diseases in the early days of the pandemics (Serrano & Kazda, 2020). The travel and tourism sectors are significant in the transmission of the virus. Thus, travel restrictions helped prevent the infected persons’ social interaction. Although the impact of the COVID 19 crisis confronted airport managers with different scenarios that had not existed previously, airports adapted to these new scenarios in the shortest time possible. The proactive way to react to the crisis is to establish a cost reduction program (Arora et al., 2021). Comparatively, Muscat International Airport and Abu Dhabi International Airport restricted their operating hours, scaled-down their personal and infrastructures, and reduced the material costs.
However, the efficiency of cost-cutting programs focused on preventing the dramatic loss of revenue. As a result, the airports-maintained infrastructure facilities (Abdoul-Azize & El Gamil, 2021). The airports collaborated with the multi-stakeholders’ initiatives to scale up the overall response mechanism according to cases and monitor the international best practices. The principles of a proactive approach helped these two airports to leverage their capabilities and reduce the spread of infections, maintain their infrastructure and protect their staff and customers.
Multidimensional and Comprehensive Approach
Muscat International Airport learned from European airports to address different aspects of the COVID 19 crisis. The multidimensional and comprehensive approach embodied crisis communication to prevent damage to the organization’s reputation. Muscat A International Airport developed public safety reputational damage. Thus, the airport management understood the crisis responsibility and anticipated attribution to the public (Scheiwiller & Zizka, 2021). For this reason, the airport focused on the dimensions that included economy and health.
The Effectiveness of the Recovery Strategy
The recovery strategy for Muscat International Airport and Abu Dhabi International Airport were effective because they focused on a collaborative approach. According to Buhusayen, Seet, and Coetzer (2020), the airports demonstrated a high level of cooperation and solidarity during the pandemic. The stakeholder cooperation reflected the interconnected nature of the crisis and the readiness of the airports to participate in the various forms of public health assistance. Although Ganghofer (2021) indicates that the role of the airports remained undefined, Muscat International Airport developed a transportation Cooperative Research Program to coordinate the transit of vaccines to different countries and expatriate citizens stuck in foreign countries (Forsyth, Guiomard, and Niemeier, 2020). Thus, this was part of the phases of emergency management that included mitigation, response preparedness, and recovery. The recovery approaches provided insight into the strategic planning that Muscat International Airport had in addressing the roles and responsibilities of the personnel in the airport during different faces. As a result, the airports created a response team that managed the various disruptions and crises triggered by COVID 19 pandemic.
Like the UAE, the Oman government supported their organizations including the airports, in short-term grants. The approach was to prevent massive job cuts. Since airports are personnel-intensive entities, the government needed to mitigate the fixed asset infrastructure. Thus, the recovery efforts succeeded because they allowed Muscat International Airport to retain employees even when the operations were sustainable (Ganghofer, 2021). The foundation of Muscat’s International Airport recovery strategies reflected the participatory framework that includes creating a partnership between the government officials and other agencies to fight the pandemic.
The significance of the crisis management framework is consistent with the foundations of comparative crisis research. The crisis management practices differ contextually depending on the airport’s leadership culture and country-specific variables (Coombsa & Laufer, 2017). However, the airports could cope with the crisis and post-crisis phase by collaborating with the stakeholders to address the impacts of the pandemic on the business, operations, revenue, and human factors (Klauser & Pauschinger, 2020). Comparative crisis management research highlights the dimensions of leadership competencies and culture as a precursor for determining crisis response and communication practice. Thus, the significance of the framework that guides the crisis management approaches in the airport’s post- COVID 19 era recognizes that the impacts were disastrous and discontinued the operations and business models (Dabachine et al., 2020). As a result, airports overcame the fragmentation that usually affects current crisis management programs and approaches, vulnerability analysis, damage containment, integration risk assessment, and early warning systems of the organization.
Management Structure of Airports and the Level Agility on the Success of Recovery Plans
The management of Muscat International Airport utilized the resilience assessment framework of different airport networks during the COVID 19 pandemic. The node failures of networks require a methodological approach that assesses the disruption from the dimension of global-scale disturbances (Guo et al., 2021). A comparative analysis of airports in Europe and China revealed that the crisis mitigation focused on the network metrics, government policy, and resiliency assessment in making decisions to resume operations. Muscat International Airport developed a framework level that allowed it to respond to the crisis occasioned by COVID 19 by setting a disaggregate resolution of the airport within the blueprint of airline demand recovery (Tirtha, Bhowmik, and Eluru, 2022). Therefore, the concept of crisis management across different airports worldwide implemented a mixture of the various frameworks in coordinating the response to restore order and normalcy. The frameworks helped the airport organizations to reduce the impact of the crisis and resume their operations. All these response strategies aligned to the crisis action planning to strengthen the organization’s crisis-preparedness.
The airports highlight interconnected entities. When the p COVID 19 pandemic hit, it affected all areas of the Air Transport System (Woltjer et al., 2022). Thus, agility factors like resilience reflect the ability to cope with complexities and dynamics flexibly. The Muscat International Airport has the same management structure as other airports. Thus, the management adjusted and adapted to the disruptions to fit the changing demands. The agile response capability combined the leading forces to handle the crisis and develop structured pro-active scenarios.
Conclusion
COVID 19 pandemic hit many sectors worldwide, leading to disruptions in business operations. The travel bans and public health advisories that restricted the movement of people affected the transport sectors in general and aviation in particular. The predominant theme in Muscat International Airport’s crisis response plan is a proactive approach. From a comparative dimension, most airports took a proactive approach in the crisis management response. The airports began monitoring the crisis conditions worldwide and evaluated the potential scenarios where their responses would work. Therefore, this aligns intending to scale the overall communication and crisis management plan following the collected data and the existing international best practices in crisis management. The proactive approach allows the organization to draw critical lessons and curb the disruptions that COVID 19 pandemic occasioned. Therefore, the crisis response strategy includes coordinating government initiatives that include working from home, social distancing, and lockdown. For this reason, Muscat International Airport effectively dealt with the COVID 19 crisis, utilizing the proactive approach and resilience framework.
References
Abdoul-Azize, H. T., & El Gamil, R. (2021). Social protection as a key tool in crisis management: learnt lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic. Global Social Welfare, 8(1), 107-116.
Al Eid, N. A. & Arnout, B. A. (2020). Crisis and disaster management in the light of the Islamic approach: COVID-19 pandemic crisis as a model (a qualitative study using grounded theory). Journal of Public Affairs, 1-14.
Al Ghafri, T., Al Ajmi, F., Al Balushi, L., Kurup, P. M., Al Ghamari, A., Al Balushi, Z., … & Al Sharji, A. (2021). Responses to the pandemic covid-19 in primary health care in oman: muscat experience. Oman Medical Journal, 36(1), e216.
Al-Debbagh, Z. S. (2020). The role of decision-maker in crisis management: A qualitative study using grounded theory (COVID-19 pandemic crisis as model). Journal of Public Affairs, 1-11.
Alves, J. C., Lok, T.C., Luo, Y., & Hao, W. (2020). Crisis management for small business during the COVID-19 outbreak: Survival, resilience and renewal strategies of firms in Macau.
Aro-Gordon, S., Hussein, A., Banu, R., Al Siyabi, W., & Al Daraai, S. A model for sustainable post-pandemic economic recovery strategy.
Arora, M., Tuchen, S., Nazemi, M., & Blessing, L. (2021). Airport pandemic response: An assessment of impacts and strategies after one year with COVID-19. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 11, 100449.
Bhaduri, R. M. (2019). Leveraging culture and leadership in crisis management. European Journal of Training and Development.
Budd, L., Ison, S., & Adrienne, N. (2020). European airline response to the COVID-19 pandemic–Contraction, consolidation, and future airline business and management considerations. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 37, 100578.
Buhusayen, B., Seet, P. S., & Coetzer, A. (2020). Turnaround management of airport service providers operating during covid-19 restrictions. Sustainability, 12(23), 10155.
Choi, J. H. (2021). Changes in Airport operating procedures and implications for airport strategies post-COVID-19. Journal of Air Transport Management, 94, 102065.
Coombs, W. T., & Laufer, D. (2018). Global crisis management–current research and future directions. Journal of International Management, 24(3), 199-203.
Curran, A (2020. August 12). Hub And Spoke Vs Point To Point – How COVID Will Change Both Models. https://simpleflying.com/hub-and-spoke-vs-point-to-point/
Dabachine, Y., Taheri, H., Biniz, M., Bouikhalene, B., & Balouki, A. (2020). Strategic design of precautionary measures for airport passengers in times of global health crisis Covid 19: parametric modelling and processing algorithms. Journal of Air Transport Management, 89, 101917.
Dube, K., Nhamo, G., & Chikodzi, D. (2021). COVID-19 pandemic and prospects for recovery of the global aviation industry. Journal of Air Transport Management, 92, 102022.
Forsyth, P., Guiomard, C., & Niemeier, H. M. (2020). Covid− 19, the collapse in passenger demand and airport charges. Journal of air transport management, 89, 101932.
Fung, C., Tsui, B., & Hon, A. H. (2020). Crisis management: A case study of disease outbreak in the Metropark Hotel group. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 25(10), 1062-1070.
Ganghofer, B (2021, Nov, 1). Managing during a crisis such as COVID-19. https://www.internationalairportreview.com/article/165491/managing-crisis-covid-19/
Guo, J., Li, Y., Yang, Z., & Zhu, X. (2021). A Quantitative method for resilience assessment framework of airport network during COVID-19. PloS one, 16(12), e0260940.
Hetu, S. N., Gupta, S., Vu, V. A., & Tan, G. (2018). A simulation framework for crisis management: Design and use. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory, 85, 15-32.
IEA (2020), “Changes in transport behavior during the Covid-19 crisis”, International Energy Agency, Paris, https://www.iea.org/articles/changes-in-transport-behaviour-during-the-covid-19-crisis
International Airport Review (2020, May 11). Abu Dhabi Airports supports efforts to combat COVID-19. https://www.internationalairportreview.com/news/117185/abu-dhabi-airport-covid19-measures/
Kamil, A. (2020). As an example, the role of public relations in crisis management with the coronavirus crisis. A case study on the UAE. Global Media Journal.
Klauser, F., & Pauschinger, D. (2022). Searching for the right balance between openness and closure: Spatial logics of crisis management and control in the policy response to pandemic disease such as COVID‐19. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 30(1), 32-40.
Le, D., & Phi, G. (2021). Strategic responses of the hotel sector to COVID-19: Toward a refined pandemic crisis management framework. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 94, 102808.
Leta, S. D., & Chan, I. C. C. (2021). Learn from the past and prepare for the future: A critical assessment of crisis management research in hospitality. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 95, 102915.
OECD (2020). OECD Policy Responses to Coronavirus (COVID-19). https://www.oecd.org/coronavirus/policy-responses/tourism-policy-responses-to-the-coronavirus-covid-19-6466aa20/
Olaganathan, R. (2021). Impact of COVID-19 on airline industry and strategic plan for its recovery with special reference to data analytics technology. Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances, 7(1), 33.
Oman Airports Annual Report (2020). Oman Airports. https://presspage-production-content.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/2571/oa-annualr-new-2020-en-b.pdf?10000
Oman Observer (2020, Mar 23). TRANSOM Activates Crisis Management Team on COVID 19. https://www.omanobserver.om/article/14418/Business/transom-activates-crisis-management-team-on-covid-19
Park, Y. E. (2021). Developing a COVID-19 crisis management strategy using news media and social media in Big Data analytics. Social Science Computer Review, 08944393211007314.
Scheiwiller, S., & Zizka, L. (2021). Strategic responses by European airlines to the Covid-19 pandemic: A soft landing or a turbulent ride?. Journal of air transport management, 95, 102103.
Serrano, F., & Kazda, A. (2020). The future of airports post COVID-19. Journal of Air Transport Management, 89, 101900.
Tirtha, S. D., Bhowmik, T., & Eluru, N. (2022). An airport level framework for examining the impact of COVID-19 on airline demand. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 159, 169-181.
Woltjer, R., Johansson, B. J., Oskarsson, P. A., Svenmarck, P., & Kirwan, B. (2022). Air Transport System Agility: The Agile Response Capability (ARC) Methodology for Crisis Preparedness. Infrastructures, 7(2), 11.