The Travel Policies Failing A Multigenerational Workforce
By Jonathan Beeby, managing director, SAP Concur Australia and New Zealand
Business travel has become a litmus test for how organisations adapt to modern working norms, evolving employee expectations, and ongoing cost-control pressures. Digital collaboration tools are firmly embedded in daily operations, and leadership teams are reassessing the strategic value of travel more critically than ever. However, SAP Concur's latest research reveals that employees are not ready to give up their seat just yet, despite the temptation to reduce travel budgets amid rising operational costs and changing ways of working.
SAP Concur's 7th annual Global Business Travel Survey shows that the majority of business travellers across Australia and New Zealand (ANZ) still see in-person engagement as either essential (59 per cent) or helpful (35 per cent) to their roles. This appetite for travel highlights a disconnect between executive assumptions and employee expectations; that gap becomes more pronounced when examining how different generations approach travel.
Distinctions are emerging across spending behaviour, personal preferences, and perceived value of work-related trips. Most employees alter their spending behaviour in some way when travelling for business compared to personal trips. Nearly half of surveyed employees (42 per cent) book higher quality hotels or premium rooms for work trips, and 37 per cent opt for direct flights even if they're more expensive. Others are more inclined to use private transport (40 per cent) or dine at premium restaurants (34 per cent) than during leisure travel.
However, while some travellers are willing to spend more on comfort, others are saving on costs. More than one-third (36 per cent) of employees spend below their daily meal allowance, and 38 per cent use personal payment cards to accrue loyalty points. Yet, the underlying motivations and outcomes of these behaviours are not uniform.
Generational differences in how employees travel, and what they prioritise, are shaping new fault lines in corporate travel management. Findings from the SAP Concur Global Business Travel Survey offer a snapshot of broad behavioural patterns among generations of business travellers worldwide.
Baby boomers are the least likely to indulge in extra spending, as just 56 per cent spend more on work trips than personal ones. They focus on value instead, with 62 per cent willing to use their own funds for upgrades, and 64 per cent saving money on company trips, often by underspending their daily meal allowance.
Gen X travellers are more likely to increase spending when travelling, with 72 per cent doing so. Nearly three-quarters (73 per cent) of Gen X also take steps to reduce costs by undercutting their per diem, like their older peers. However, they're more willing to spend personal funds on travel perks (74 per cent), such as premium seating or extending their stay. Gen X travellers are split when it comes to being satisfied with how often they travel for work, with 21 per cent wanting to travel less and 20 per cent wanting to travel more.
Millennials stand out for their elevated travel spending. The majority (89 per cent) increase their spending on business trips compared to leisure, and 88 per cent are prepared to fund their own accommodation or transport upgrades. Loyalty program engagement is also high, with 87 per cent seeking to earn points during trips. Despite this, fewer than half (47 per cent) are satisfied with the amount of travel they do, indicating demand for more face-to-face engagement.
Gen Z displays the most extravagant habits, with 94 per cent receiving upgrades when using company funds and 93 per cent willing to pay out of pocket for additional perks. Though their cost awareness remains strong, 92 per cent actively look for ways to save by underspending or collecting perks.
However, safety concerns set them apart from older travellers: 64 per cent express anxiety about air travel, and almost one in five (19 per cent) are reluctant to accept a trip that requires flying. They're also more likely to feel overburdened by business travel, with 34 per cent saying they travel too much.
The research findings are clear: a one-size-fits-all approach to travel is no longer viable. The differences aren't marginal; they reflect meaningful shifts that warrant attention, and they raise questions around travel policy design, accountability, and cultural expectations. Legacy policies that don't account for personal preference, generational behaviour, or new working patterns risk creating internal friction, increasing policy breaches, and undermining the value of business travel itself.
The solution is not to eliminate travel, nor to hand over unlimited discretion. Instead, companies should build more flexible travel policies that cater to diverse needs while reinforcing cultural values. This may include offering options within policy that accommodate different comfort levels and travel preferences, productivity tools, or booking channels, combined with clearer communications on expectations and empowerment to make informed, responsible choices.
Business travel remains a powerful catalyst for relationship-building, idea-sharing, and growth. To harness its full potential, organisations must treat travel as an evolving strategy, not a static expense line. That means understanding how generational insights influence behaviour and shape policies accordingly.
In doing so, companies can enhance employee satisfaction and ensure that travel continues to deliver real value in an evolving work environment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time Business News
7 hours ago
- Time Business News
Would You Pay More for Carbon-Neutral Products?'
The conversation around climate change has shifted from 'if' to 'how.' People are no longer debating whether human activities contribute to global warming; they're discussing how we can reduce our footprint. One of the most prominent ideas in recent years is the concept of carbon-neutral products, which are goods and services that offset their greenhouse gas emissions entirely. But this raises an important and personal question: Would you pay more for them? This question is not only a matter of ethics but also of economics, marketing, and consumer psychology. Carbon neutrality means that the total greenhouse gases produced in making, transporting, and using a product are balanced out by removing or preventing an equivalent amount of emissions elsewhere. This can be achieved through various methods, such as renewable energy investments, reforestation projects, or verified carbon offset programs. Some companies even offer a carbon offset subscription that lets consumers actively support climate-positive initiatives tied to their purchases. Consumer behavior is often influenced by emotions rather than just logic. For many, buying a carbon-neutral product is a way to feel like they're making a difference. It's an act of aligning personal values with purchasing decisions. People may be willing to pay more if they believe their extra money directly supports the fight against climate change. This emotional satisfaction can be a powerful driver for eco-friendly spending. On the other hand, the willingness to pay more has limits. Economic realities such as inflation, stagnant wages, and rising living costs make consumers sensitive to price differences. A product marketed as carbon-neutral may cost 5–20% more, depending on the industry. For some households, that premium is easy to absorb; for others, it's an unaffordable luxury. This creates a gap between environmental ideals and purchasing behavior. One major factor that affects willingness to pay is trust. Not all carbon-neutral claims are equal. Consumers have become wary of 'greenwashing,' where companies exaggerate or misrepresent their environmental efforts. To convince buyers to pay extra, brands must be transparent about how their carbon neutrality is achieved. Detailed reporting, third-party certifications, and clear explanations of their carbon offset subscription programs can increase consumer confidence. Younger generations, especially Millennials and Gen Z, tend to be more climate-conscious. Surveys show they are more likely to spend extra on sustainable options compared to Baby Boomers or Gen X. This generational divide isn't just about values—it's also about perceived responsibility. Younger consumers often see climate change as their problem to solve, making them more open to supporting carbon-neutral initiatives, even at a higher cost. Businesses are increasingly positioning themselves as leaders in sustainability. Offering carbon-neutral products can differentiate them in crowded markets. Some brands integrate the cost of offsets into their pricing, making the shift seamless for customers. Others provide optional add-ons, such as a carbon offset subscription, allowing consumers to opt in at checkout. How this is presented can determine whether buyers view it as a reasonable investment or an unnecessary surcharge. Many consumers underestimate the impact of individual actions. A single purchase might seem insignificant compared to the scale of the climate crisis. Yet, behavioral economics shows that people are more likely to act when they see collective participation. Campaigns highlighting that 'millions of small purchases add up' can encourage buyers to contribute willingly, making them feel part of a larger movement. Price sensitivity remains the biggest barrier, but it's not the only one. Lack of awareness, skepticism, and confusing terminology also reduce willingness to pay more. Some people simply don't understand how carbon offsetting works. Education campaigns and simplified explanations can help break down these barriers, making carbon-neutral purchases feel more accessible. Humans are social creatures, and purchasing decisions often follow trends. If carbon-neutral products become a social norm—much like recycling or reusable bags—more people will follow suit. Social proof can be a powerful motivator, especially when combined with public commitments or visible recognition for sustainable purchases. The discussion about paying more for carbon-neutral products ultimately blends moral obligation, market forces, and human psychology. On one hand, the environmental crisis is urgent, and shifting consumption patterns can be part of the solution. On the other hand, the world's economy is built on affordability, and millions of people are already struggling financially. The ethical argument is clear: reducing emissions benefits everyone, and those who can afford to pay more arguably have a responsibility to do so. However, making sustainability a luxury risks deepening social divides. The best path forward may be a combination of corporate responsibility, government policy, and consumer action. Companies should absorb some of the costs, governments can incentivize sustainable practices, and consumers can signal demand through purchases. Education and transparency are essential so that people understand how their extra spending translates into real-world climate benefits. Only when these elements align will paying more for carbon-neutral products become a widespread and lasting behavior, rather than a niche trend among eco-conscious elites. TIME BUSINESS NEWS
New York Post
2 days ago
- New York Post
Financial expert warns young Americans against ‘buy now, pay later' plans as shopping tactic growing in popularity
'Buy now, pay later' plans are rapidly growing in popularity among young Americans, but not everyone is convinced they're a smart financial choice. Haley Sacks, a personal finance influencer with over a million followers online, issued a chilling warning about BNPL plans on 'Fox & Friends' Tuesday, calling the practice 'predatory.' Advertisement 'My take is that you should not use 'buy now, pay later' at all,' Sacks said. 'If you need to finance something, use a credit card and a lot of credit card companies have 'pay over time' options with 0% interest.' Sacks argued credit cards offer important benefits BNPL plans don't, such as consumer protection and the opportunity to build credit. 'Buy now, pay later' services let buyers split purchases into multiple installments instead of paying the full price upfront. However, if users aren't careful to make payments on time, they may face late fees. Advertisement 3 'Buy now, pay later' plans are rapidly growing in popularity among young Americans, where buyers pay with multiple installments instead of the full price upfront. Bloomberg via Getty Images 3 Haley Sacks, a personal finance influencer with over a million followers online, warns against the practice, calling it 'predatory,' and saying that it doesn't offer benefits like consumer protection that credit cards do. fizkes – They're expected to hit record transaction volumes this year after initially being marketed as lower-risk alternatives to credit cards. But financial experts warn that reliance on these payment plans can lead to overspending and a rapid accumulation of debt if consumers aren't on top of them. A LendingTree survey from April found that more Americans are using BNPL services for everyday essentials like groceries, and that 40% of users admitted to missing a payment on at least one loan in the past year. Advertisement 3 Experts say the plans can lead to overspending and debt if consumers aren't on time with payments. Bloomberg via Getty Images Factors that could be leading to the shift are elevated prices, high interest rates, and student loan payments, which resumed less than two years ago after a stop during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sacks says these factors are part of why these types of deferred payment plans have resonated with a struggling generation of young people. Advertisement 'Gen Z is facing so much inflation, wages have not kept up, and this is a way to actually be able to get things that you want,' she said. 'But of course, then you're paying the price.' According to the LendingTree survey of 2,000 consumers aged 18 to 79, nearly half of American adults have used a BNPL service such as Klarna or Affirm. Millennials made up the largest share, but Gen Z and Gen X weren't far behind.
CNBC
2 days ago
- CNBC
Some concertgoers use buy now, pay later loans for tickets. Start a 'Beyoncé fund' instead, analyst says
Many Americans have become accustomed to breaking up big purchases with buy now, pay later loans — including tickets for concerts and other live events. Going to a live concert is not cheap: Tours of big-name artists including Taylor Swift, Beyoncé and Coldplay have in part spurred a rise in ticket prices for live events in recent years, a trend economists call "funflation." Admission fees to movies, theaters and concerts were up 3.9% in the 12 months through June, according to the latest Bureau of Labor Statistics figures. And while the Federal Trade Commission changed a rule in May to make ticket pricing more transparent, experts say the move won't make costs go down. More from Personal Finance:Senate introduces bill for tariff rebate checksFed holds interest rates steady: What that means for your moneyTrump's tariffs could soon bring higher food prices, analysis finds Almost a quarter, 23%, of respondents in a new survey by LendingTree said they have used buy now, pay later loans for concert or festival costs. Rates are higher among younger generations, with 37% of Generation Z and 35% of millennials saying they've used the loans for these purposes. The site defined Gen Z as adults ages 18 to 28, and millennials as those ages 29 to 44. To compare, 19% of Gen Xers, which the site defines as adults ages 45 to 60 — said they've used buy now, pay later loans for concerts, followed by 3% of baby boomers, those ages 61 to 79. LendingTree said it surveyed 2,050 adults in the U.S. in mid-June. Of those, 1,047 said they plan to attend a concert or festival in the summer or fall. It's not unusual to see Gen Zers and millennials leading the use of buy now, pay later loans, said Matt Schulz, chief credit analyst at LendingTree. Young Americans are most familiar with the form of payment, and their use of it for concerts and festivals speaks to the "time of life" they're in, he said. "Part of the reason why I ended up in credit card debt in my 20s was because I was going to concerts and seeing my favorite bands," Schulz said. If concerts and other live events are important to you, he said, work the expenses into your budget and create a savings fund specifically with them in mind. "Carve out money in your budget as your 'Beyoncé fund' or your 'Taylor Swift fund,'" Schulz said. If you do need to stretch out the cost of attending a concert, here's what to know about buy now, pay later loans versus credit cards. Buy now, pay later plans have certain advantages, but they might not offer the same protections as credit cards, especially if things go wrong with the concert or live event, experts say. The loans became a popular option because they allow consumers to spread the total cost over installment payments in a short time frame, often without interest, said Greg McBride, chief financial analyst at Bankrate. However, the form of payment has evolved to the point where not all buy now, pay later plans are "cut from the same mold," he said. Most plans consist of four installment payments, but others have longer repayment terms. Those may charge an annual percentage rate, or interest, of up to 36%, according to NerdWallet. Some plans also charge fees for late or rescheduled payments, which can cost up to $15 or even 25% of the purchase value, according to NerdWallet. Credit cards can be pricier than buy now, pay later, experts say, but they have other advantages. Like some buy now, pay later plans, credit cards charge late fees and interest on unpaid balances. While some cards offer new cardholders brief interest-free offers on purchases, the average credit card interest rate is just over 20%, according to Bankrate. But most cards typically offer purchase protections that you might not get from a buy now, pay later plan, said McBride. "Paying with a credit card can make it easier to get your money back if the concert gets canceled," he said. Some cards offer rewards such as cash back, points or miles on purchases. About 65% of those who plan to attend a concert or festival this year said they will use credit card rewards to help pay for their costs, according to LendingTree's report.
