It is a major decision for Biman but, surprisingly, there was muted response in the press and from critics who usually are quite vocal. There can be two explanations for this; they either consider Biman beyond salvation, or the government is not serious and this exercise will not be successful.

In any case, no one felt any interest in the future of Biman. Perhaps they were unable to appreciate, or were not convinced about, how a PLC fully owned by the state was any different from the current status, and how it would turn Biman around. I would humbly request the government to provide details of how they planned to make Biman more efficient and competitive to increase sales and turn a profit.

When one compares Biman with other airlines, the common parameters are the balance sheet, management, skill level of the workforce, remuneration, safety record and image. Biman does not score high on any of these, and its image has taken a battering.

All previous attempts to bring about changes did not bear fruit because of resistance from within the organization. Everyone in Biman, starting from the leaders to the union bosses and senior executives, had a partial remedy for Biman's woes, but nothing worthwhile ever materialized.

A previous effort made with World Bank support fell victim to the unions' "know-all attitude" that it would not be in the best interest of Biman and the country. A case of misplaced patriotism! Several years on, they are older and wiser, but Biman is no better; it has slipped further into debt and crisis.

The recent effort by Biman to downsize its workforce was a courageous step, and the management deserves applause. I hope that this was worked out rationally, and not because of other considerations.

Reduction of flights would make some of the workforce redundant. Rationalization of Biman's destinations and number of flights, in keeping with the size of the current fleet, has to some extent brought discipline in Biman's schedule. Is this enough? Are these isolated steps, or are they a part of a grand plan?

An airline's biggest asset is its image. It is in the motivation and morale, which are now on the low side. Opinions vary widely about the reasons for this, but all agree that they were never sufficiently addressed.

Motivation without comparative remuneration does not stay at a high level for long. Biman's employees' remuneration, in comparison with other airlines, is fairly low, and as soon as the job becomes permanent, the work force in general lapses into mediocrity. The skill level in Biman is comparable to other established airlines, but some malpractices which adversely affect the performance have developed over the years.

Moreover, airlines all over the world are largely software dependent but Biman has lagged behind, and the flow of information is slow and not always easily accessible to all. The most common complaint about Biman is that potential passengers are told that the flight is full, but after getting on board one finds many seats empty.

Even on a full flight, it is possible to get a seat if you know the right people or the right art. The trade unions of Biman have grown along political lines, and try to influence decisions, postings and promotions. They have also given Biman a bad image.

Most of Biman's operations are beyond the national boundaries, and a major part of its revenue earnings are from its international operations. The domestic operations form a small part of overall operations. With increasing number of airlines coming to Bangladesh, and with competition increasing, Biman does not enjoy home turf advantage any more.

Passengers have choice, they are increasingly more discerning, and Biman is usually not the first or even the second choice. The quality of service has suffered at all levels, on the ground and in the air. Because Biman has been a losing concern for most of its life, it does not even generate enough interest among the board members, with the exception of a few. They have little time for a full, detailed review of Biman's activities.

The Biman Board takes a lot of decisions, but it has to follow the government rules for major purchases like aircraft and engines. Often, decisions referred to the government linger, and individuals who understand little about airlines and the urgency make these.

The delay is not deliberate, and oftentimes with good intention, but the process is lengthy and costly, and sometimes creates problems later. Biman is a corporation, but that is not enough to make it competitive. It still bears all the trappings of a government controlled entity, which is hardly suitable for an airline.

Here, a lot of delegation of responsibility has to be done, but with delegation comes the possibility of misuse, so there has to be a set of checks and balances. In Biman, these set of checks and balances are not oriented toward maintaining a dynamic business environment. They are bureaucratic in nature, and often discourage imitative. This culture permeates the entire organization.

For Biman to be profitable, there has to be a suitable strategy to compete with other airlines, and an overhauling of the top management. The management must have the freedom to plan and execute and, if Biman has to remain in the public sector, the board members should be carefully chosen so that they are committed and spare enough time to give policy guidelines, oversee the affairs and hold the management accountable.

To be an efficient and dynamic airline, Biman has to reinvent itself. It has to take advantage of IT to create a modern workplace conducive to efficient management and availability of real-time information. A system of accountability and flow of information throughout the organization is crucial for its wellbeing, and Biman is lacking in this regard.

Ironically, anybody and everybody, whether in Biman or not, has a solution for Biman's problems. Sometimes influential individuals who are late for a flight call up to delay it till their arrival, and people in Biman oblige lest their promotion or posting is affected. The unions have developed political lines and patronage, and this has always done more bad than good.

The total culture at the workplace needs a drastic change. The private sector airlines have profited from Biman's ineptness, and they and the foreign airlines have increased frequencies and cut deep into Biman's market share.

Everybody agrees that something has to be done about Biman. Offloading shares in the local market is an option, but is hardly expected to be a solution as it is unlikely to guarantee an efficient management. Hiring outside management could be a solution if there is strong backing from the government.

As a short-term measure it may succeed, but Biman needs something for the long term. Offloading shares to a reputed airline that would have management control is also an option, but it would be difficult to find interested parties unless a team of well-connected and reputed individuals gets strong backing from the government.

Reforms and restructuring have become a crying need, and Biman today is possibly more receptive to reforms than at any other time in the past. Some may say that it is already late but, hopefully, not too late.

In the current circumstances, this caretaker government is possibly best placed to tackle the issue. They have shown considerable determination, and should now turn their attention to Biman. There are parts of Biman which are profitable, but overall it is suffering loss. Making Biman a public limited company is not going to be easy, and it can only succeed if the caretaker government is serious and committed, and stays long enough to see it through.

What happens after the caretaker government is gone is a question we can leave for later. For now, let us save Biman, once the proud flag bearer of Bangladesh in three continents.

Rafiqul Islam is former Chief of Air Staff, Bangladesh Air Force and former Managing Director, Bangladesh Biman.