Top Management Issues Radar 2013

Transcription

1 SURVEY Top Management Issues Radar 2013 Aerospace & Defence industry

2 WHY PRODUCE A TOP MANAGEMENT ISSUES RADAR? As a top strategy consultancy in the Aerospace & Defence sector, Roland Berger Strategy Consultants actively supports industry leaders in identifying challenges, uncovering solutions and driving decisive change in their organizations In 2008 we identified a growing need for dialogue amongst senior executives regarding the key issues that affect the industry. Therefore, we launched a "Top Management Issues Radar" to support executive-level thinking across the Aerospace & Defence industry This 6th edition of our survey was conducted during spring/summer 2013, involving more than 100 senior industry executives and representing a broad range of segments and positions in the value chain. The survey has captured prevailing trends on innovation: > What are its objectives? > What are the most promising approaches, and what difficulties need to be overcome? Here are our conclusions. We trust you will find them insightful and relevant to your strategic thinking and decision making. We would welcome the opportunity to have a more detailed discussion directly with you on any of the issues presented The Aerospace & Defence practice management team Georgy Babilashvily (Russia) Antonio Benecchi (US) Hélène Burger (Japan) Sébastien Cailliau (Belgium) Roberto Crapelli (Italy) Jorge Delclaux (Spain) Damien Dujacquier (Singapore) Martin Eisenhut (Germany) Daniel Feldman (France) Rahul Gangal (India) Didier Gobin (France) François Guenard (France) Manfred Hader (Germany) Feng Ke (China) Stephan Keese (Brazil) Uwe Kumm (Russia) Thomas Kunze (Brazil) Serge Lhoste (Canada) Paolo Massardi (Italy) Alberto De Monte (Italy) Alain d Oultremont (Belgium) Mathieu Pacault (France) Philippe Plouvier (France) Juergen Reers (US) Jérôme Rein (France) Ali Rekik (France) Paul Sloman (UK) Robert Thomson (UK) Joerg Wahler (Germany) Michael Wette (Middle East) Jonathan Wright (US) Qi Wu (China) Fanny Zhang (China)

3 THE 2013 SURVEY RESULTS ARE BASED ON CONTRIBUTIONS FROM SENIOR EXECUTIVES ACROSS THE AEROSPACE & DEFENCE INDUSTRY SAMPLE PORTRAIT EXAMPLES OF PARTICIPATING COMPANIES Survey responses from more than 100 top managers worldwide (Europe, Russia, Brazil...) 70 firms represented, covering a range of business segments (commercial aeronautics, defence & security, space) Coverage of different positions on the value chain, from OEMs to Tier-1, Tier-2 and pure service providers Approximately one third of the participants are CEOs

4 MAIN OUTCOMES a. COMPANY AGENDAS IN 2013 b. INNOVATION: stakes and objectives > Finding new growth opportunities and fulfilling production commitments are the top concerns for senior European A&D executives > Consequently, most companies plan to sustain growth initiatives both in terms of product/service portfolio extension and geographic expansion > 90% of companies interviewed consider that innovation will be a more important factor to success in the coming decade than it was in the past > Innovation is expected to contribute to priority operational objectives, particularly increasing the value of products & services, and cost reduction > 1/3 of respondents also see the relationship with industrial partners and customers/operators as a critical area for innovation > ~ 80% of respondents foresee a stable environment in which innovation continues to be driven by primes or tier-1 suppliers

5 MAIN OUTCOMES c. d. INNOVATION: most promising approaches and difficulties to overcome VISION OF THE A&D BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT IN 2020 > Most respondents are satisfied by their current level of innovation for products & services. However the picture is different in the area of business models and market approach > Two thirds of the companies interviewed see incremental innovation as the most efficient model (vs. disruptive innovation) > 70% of respondents consider that collaboration with an external network of partners is key to innovating successfully > Funding and introducing innovations into commercialized products & services are the biggest obstacles along the path to innovation > With budget cuts affecting both military and civil innovation programmes, 2/3 of respondents consider that self-funded innovation will prevail > Robust gating and early customer/operator involvement are the key factors in ensuring the maturity and readiness of innovations before they "go live" > The defence sector is dealing with its major current concern: budget cuts, whereas the civil sector may have difficulties in dealing with numerous topics that are apparently of equal importance > New technologies are now seen as a driver of the industry structure as important as emerging competition and new business models

6 TOPICS a. COMPANY AGENDAS IN 2013 b. INNOVATION: stakes and objectives c. INNOVATION: most promising approaches and difficulties to overcome d. VISION OF THE A&D BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT IN

7 a. Company agendas in 2013 FINDING NEW GROWTH OPPORTUNITIES AND FULFILLING PRODUCTION COMMITMENTS ARE THE TOP CONCERNS FOR SENIOR EUROPEAN A&D EXECUTIVES TOP PRIORITY IN COMPANY'S AGENDA [4 MOST FREQUENT ANSWERS] # Programme Management Programme Management Programme Management Programme Management Manufacturing Market Strategy/ Globalisation The return of growth to the top of the agenda in 2011 had been a significant change vs. the previous years when companies were focused on the completion of major development programmes and cost containment Growth topics such as Market Strategy/Globalisation and Product Strategy are very likely to become top priorities repeatedly. These priorities are in particular driving the growing focus on innovation analyzed in this year's survey #2 Market Strategy/ Globalisation Market Strategy/ Globalisation Market Strategy/ Globalisation Market Strategy/ Globalisation Supply Chain Manufacturing Manufacturing and Supply Chain also remain top concerns for European A&D decision-makers who need to fulfil production commitments Securing on-time delivery in line with production plans has turned into a real challenge for aircraft manufacturers and their supply chains, as: #3 Supply Chain Flexibility Product Strategy R&D Efficiency Market Strategy/ Globalisation Product Strategy > Several major programmes are moving from development to early series production or ramp-up phases: A350XWB (most aggressive Airbus ramp-up objective ever), Global 7000/8000, CSeries >...while aircraft manufacturers' pressure on legacy programmes remains high in terms of production rate increase and on-time delivery requirements #4 External Growth/PMI Marketing & Sales Supply Chain Supply Chain Programme Management Supply Chain The challenge is even greater as: > Most companies are under high pressure to reduce recurring costs to compensate development cost overruns and improve their cash positions > Previous production ramp-ups have frequently been achieved at high cost (extra production shifts, permanent representation at client's site )

8 a. Company agendas in 2013 CONSEQUENTLY, MOST COMPANIES PLAN TO SUSTAIN GROWTH INITIATIVES BOTH IN TERMS OF PRODUCT/SERVICE PORTFOLIO EXTENSION AND GEOGRAPHIC EXPANSION GROWTH INITIATIVES SUSTAINED VS. LAST YEAR [% ANSWERS] NO YES 100% 13% 87% 100% 18% 82% With no major programme foreseen in the civil or military sectors before , fulfilling growth objectives will be a challenge for most players 2013's survey confirms companies willingness to grow in terms of product and service portfolio > Product-related services: mainly after-sales services but also advanced services (e.g. connectivity services) > Engineering services, to leverage existing capabilities and anticipate the foreseen decrease in design offices' workloads after the completion of current major developments > Product, mainly at tier-1 supplier level Broader product/ service portfolio Geographic expansion Although geographic expansion remains an important growth option, it raises significant challenges for Western companies, particularly in light of > the fierce competition between local and Western companies in BRIC markets > the numerous challenges in addressing markets outside Western countries: control of technology transfer, local supplier development as a prerequisite to fulfil offset requirements, understanding of local/political rules of the game, as analyzed in last year's survey

9 b. Innovation: stakes and objectives 90% OF COMPANIES INTERVIEWED CONSIDER THAT INNOVATION WILL BE A MORE IMPORTANT FACTOR TO SUCCESS IN THE COMING DECADE THAN IT WAS IN THE PAST COMPANIES WHICH BELIEVE THAT INNOVATION WILL BE A MORE IMPORTANT SUCCESS FACTOR IN THE COMING DECADE [% ANSWERS] NO 9% 91% YES The vast majority of respondents expect innovation to become a key differentiating factor, in particular for Western companies to fuel expansion in new geographies and beat the competition from BRICs and other emerging countries whose > operational performance (deliveries on Time, on Quality) is progressively reaching Western standards > costs remain below Western levels Consistent with this vision, and given the maturity of companies, they expect > Western countries to remain the main origin of innovation for the coming decade (71% of respondents) > ahead of BRICs (19%) > and other geographies (10%), although the technological know-how of several non-western players (e.g. Brazil, India, China) has significantly benefited from (1) technology transfer in recent decades and (2) BRIC R,T&D spending growing 2-3 times faster than the average in US, Europe and Japan With multiple major developments under-way or almost completed, industry attention is naturally shifting towards the next generation of production/ services ( ), where innovations will have to be embedded to continue improving the performance and value of products & services and meet operators' expectations

10 b. Innovation: stakes and objectives INNOVATION IS EXPECTED TO CONTRIBUTE TO PRIORITY OPERATIONAL OBJECTIVES, PARTICULARLY INCREASING PRODUCT & SERVICE VALUE, AND COST REDUCTION KEY OBJECTIVES OF INNOVATION INITIATIVES [% APPEARANCE IN TOP 3 ANSWERS] Increasing the value of existing product/service offerings for the customer Reducing costs/ increasing efficiency and quality Reducing time to market for new products/services Moulding customer needs/ reshaping the market or value chain Expanding into new market segments Improving corporate brand and reputation Improving environmental/ social responsibility Improving the company s image as an employer 3% 3% 2% 14% 13% 17% 25% 24% Operational objectives 66% Strategic objectives 27% Sustainable development objectives 8% Innovation is expected to contribute to priority operational objectives (66% of respondents) > Increasing value > Reducing costs + > Reducing time to market The two first objectives highlight the ability of innovation to support opposing strategies (not exclusive) to differentiate from the competition > Increasing value to offer premium/high end product and services > Reducing costs to provide frugal offers In the context of high business pressure, companies are less willing to fund innovation to pursue objectives with a longer/more risky payback (e.g. brand, social responsibility)

11 b. Innovation: stakes and objectives 1/3 OF RESPONDENTS ALSO SEE THE RELATIONSHIP WITH INDUSTRIAL PARTNERS AND CUSTOMERS/ OPERATORS AS A CRITICAL AREA FOR INNOVATION MOST CRITICAL INNOVATION AREAS TO ENABLE SUCCESS [% APPEARANCE IN TOP 3 ANSWERS] Product function/technology Customer service Relationship with other industrial players and customers/operators Internal and external operations/processes Financing Marketing model and distribution 8% 8% 24% 30% 38% Innovation top objectives (see previous page) > Increasing the value of existing product/service offerings > Reducing internal costs/increasing efficiency and quality will logically demand innovation in the field of products/services as well as internal/external operations One third of respondents also see the relationship with other industrial partners and customers/operators as a critical area for innovation > Industrial partners: major programmes such as the F-35, B787 and A350XWB have shown the benefits but also limitations of a first generation of collaborative models (risk sharing schemes, early supplier involvement, large WPs), e.g. in terms of contractual and operational complexity (split of development process & accountabilities). Most players already plan to elaborate on a second generation of collaborative models > End-customers/operators: performance-based contracts are seen as an attractive area of innovation both by industrial and operators seeking win-win solutions. Again, some attempts to go beyond the standard Fly-Hour-Services have shown the complexity of advanced performance-based contracts Innovations in this field will impact business models and core competencies... and could drive significant evolution of the market/ value chain structure

12 b. Innovation: stakes and objectives ~ 80% OF RESPONDENTS FORESEE A STABLE ENVIRONMENT WHERE INNOVATION CONTINUES TO BE DRIVEN BY PRIMES OR TIER-1 SUPPLIERS ORIGIN OF INNOVATION FOR THE COMING DECADE ACTORS [% OF ANSWERS] 48% 6% 4% Respondents expect a continuation of the status quo, where innovation is driven by primes and/or tier-1 suppliers, over the coming decade The role of Primes and tier-1 suppliers is expected to be of the same importance > Following M&A movements over the last decade, most major tier-1 suppliers have reached the critical size to be able to set up innovation programmes and fund them/search for funding. With margins frequently higher than Primes, their innovation effort may even be more significant > In parallel to primes' repositioning on architecture/integration, tier-1 suppliers are increasingly expected to bear the innovation effort in their field of expertise at component/sub-system level (composite material, electrical aircraft,...) 11% Sub-tier suppliers 31% Tier-1 suppliers Primes/ OEM Operators Public sector bodies (universities, agencies) Public sector bodies are not expected to drive innovation, but their support will be key for industrial players > Only 4% of respondents expect universities and governmental bodies to drive innovation > Meanwhile, Public Private partnerships are considered to be the second most favourable structure for innovating (see pages below). In the current context of budget cuts, most industrials see in public sector bodies a source of know-how and expertise With a large part of sub-tier suppliers being Build-to-Print suppliers, particularly within the airframe/structure business, they are not expected to play a major role in future innovations. Opportunities may therefore be lost as other industries (e.g. electronics) have demonstrated the potential for small companies to innovate successfully

13 c. Innovation: most promising approaches and difficulties to overcome MOST RESPONDENTS ARE SATISFIED BY THEIR CURRENT LEVEL OF INNOVATION FOR PRODUCTS & SERVICES. HOWEVER THE PICTURE IS DIFFERENT IN THE AREA OF BUSINESS MODELS AND MARKET APPROACH GAP BETWEEN CURRENT AND REQUIRED LEVEL OF INNOVATION [% OF ANSWERS] 20% 28% 39% 12% 1% AREA WHERE COMPANIES INNOVATE BEST Products & Services (inc. technology) Operations Business model, market approach, sales Financing Others 2% 1% 16% 14% 66% Net effect +46% -12% -25% -10% 0% Product & Services see most of the benefit of companies' innovation efforts, especially when structured R&T departments/ programmes and dedicated funding are established Innovation performance in the field of business models/market approaches and sales is significantly lower. Reasons include > A recent awareness of the innovation potential in this area > "Entry barriers", ie. the need to strengthen the customer-orientation of the whole company to capture and make sense of "weak signals" from customers and competition at all levels develop an innovation culture, beyond the R&T/ Engineering community (motivation, risk taking, openness) AREA WHERE COMPANY S LEVEL OF INNOVATION IS THE WEAKEST structure new processes to drive this new kind of innovations up to implementation

14 c. Innovation: most promising approaches and difficulties to overcome TWO THIRD OF THE COMPANIES INTERVIEWED SEE INCREMENTAL INNOVATION AS THE MOST EFFICIENT MODEL (vs. DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION) MOST EFFICIENT MODEL FOR INNOVATION [% ANSWERS] DISRUPTIVE 36% 64% INCREMENTAL The balance between disruptive and incremental innovation illustrates the industry dilemma between the needs to > achieve the performance expected by the market between two generations of products/services and sustain a competitive advantage compared to emerging competitors > secure full safety and reduce business risks by embedding step-by-step enhancements, and avoiding high investments required by disruptive innovation A mix of both approaches can be considered as illustrated by Engine providers that provide a good example of successful sequences of disruptive innovation (e.g. introduction of High bypass ratio jet engines) followed by incremental improvements leading to regular performance increases. Additional reasons can explain the apparent lack of attractiveness of disruptive innovation > Risk-aversion among well established key players within the industry (or their shareholders) that can prevent the consideration of radical new concepts > The stability of architectural concepts (e.g. at aircraft level), pushing the innovation arena down to parts/materials and systems/equipment > The potential for incremental innovation to sustain competences in design offices, pending major new development programmes

15 c. Innovation: most promising approaches and difficulties to overcome 70% OF RESPONDENTS CONSIDER THAT COLLABORATION WITH AN EXTERNAL NETWORK OF PARTNERS IS KEY TO INNOVATING SUCCESSFULLY MOST FAVOURABLE STRUCTURES FOR INNOVATING [% APPEARANCE IN TOP 3 ANSWERS] 100% 37% 10% 8% EXTERNAL NETWORK Industrial partnerships 15% 70% with customers/suppliers with non A&D companies with peers/competitors Public-Private partnerships 9% 8% Aquisitions of companies of innovations/patents 12% Stand-alone, Press, Company communication 1% Subcontracting The survey shows a clear consensus that collaboration with an external network of partners is key to innovating successfully The panel of preferred partners (customers/ suppliers and public bodies) appears conservative compared to other industries where companies partner more easily with peers/competitors Other industries also provide best practice examples of "innovative" partnerships/ networks (e.g. retirees) > Procter & Gamble "Connect and Develop" programme Each engineer connected to the network Incentives to discover the world outside P&G No differences between "inners" and "outsiders" > Porsche ceramic brake engineering center Year-long competition between two German universities Best students from the universities hired to form the basis of a new ceramic brake engineering centre

16 c. Innovation: most promising approaches and difficulties to overcome FUNDING AND INTRODUCING INNOVATIONS INTO COMMERCIALIZED PRODUCTS & SERVICES ARE THE BIGGEST OBSTACLES ALONG THE PATH TO INNOVATION BIGGEST OBSTACLE ALONG THE PATH TO SUCCESSFUL INNOVATION [% ANSWERS] 28% 29% 11% 6% 11% 12% 3% Funding E.g. due to ROI requirement and pressure for short term results Generating Selecting Developing Identifying trends and generating new ideas Internal and external funding under pressure > Budget cuts affecting both military and civil innovation programmes > Cash constraints for most players involved in major recent programmes not yet delivering their revenues Selecting the best ideas to pursue Developing ideas from concept to prototype/pilot case Commercializing Introducing innovations into commercialized product & service or company operations (proto to full scale) Multiple factors of complexity > Accountability not clearly allocated in most organizations (activity at the interface of R&T, Engineering, Programmes and Business accountabilities) > Need to synchronize the maturity of innovation bricks and the main development streams, and in numerous cases, to cope with the introduction of immature technologies Exploiting Exploiting innovations for commercial advantage/gaining market acceptance Protecting Protecting innovation (e.g. in the case of partnerships) Underestimated? Ozires Silva, Embraer founder "Once you have created something innovative, the most important thing is to protect the asset. If you don t protect your intellectual property, you are going to have unfair competition" (press)

17 c. Innovation: most promising approaches and difficulties to overcome WITH BUDGET CUTS AFFECTING BOTH MILITARY AND CIVIL INNOVATION PROGRAMMES, 2/3 OF RESPONDENTS BELIEVE THAT SELF-FUNDED INNOVATION WILL PREVAIL SOURCES OF FUNDING IN ORDER OF PRIORITY [% ANSWERS] With budget cuts affecting both military and civil innovation programmes, two thirds of respondents believe that self-funded innovation will prevail Self-funding Governments 19% 68% The shift towards self-funding may have multiple consequences, including the following: > With government funding increasingly limited, manufacturers, suppliers, operators, incl. infrastructure operators, need to organize themselves to ensure the convergence of their innovation efforts toward consistent objectives, in particular in the field of "systems of systems" where a high level of coordination between stakeholders is required to enable innovation projects with long pay back periods, e.g. at architectural level > The necessity to rethink the architecture of products and move toward modular architectures to split and spread the innovation effort/cost over time > The need to increase profitability to fund innovation. This could lead in particular to the repositioning of manufacturers towards In Service Support, to gain an increased share of the profitable revenues mainly captured today by tier-1 suppliers (spares & repairs), in order to increase self-funding capacity Customers Suppliers 1% 12%

18 c. Innovation: most promising approaches and difficulties to overcome ROBUST GATING AND EARLY CUSTOMER/ OPERATOR INVOLVEMENT ARE KEY TO ENSURING THE MATURITY AND READINESS OF INNOVATIONS BEFORE THEY "GO LIVE" BEST WAYS TO ENSURE THE MATURITY AND READINESS OF INNOVATIONS BEFORE THEY "GO LIVE" [% APPEARANCE IN TOP 3 ANSWERS] Robust go/no go gates and portfolio management 21% Early customer / operator involvement 19% Robust project management for each innovation Culture: promotion of risk taking, Top Management involvement and commitment Plateau phases / multi-functional teams Full scale tests / demonstrations Virtual prototyping / simulation Challenge by experts / review panels Appropriate incentives / rewards Other options, US GAO, Roland Berger 2% 1% 6% 5% 10% 9% 13% 11% Robust go/no go gates and portfolio management > Upstream, a frequently observed weakness is the lack of selectiveness of go/ no go gates and overall inability to actually stop projects, which leads to a dilution of financial/human resources over too many topics vs. focus on most promising topics to secure their maturity the embodiment of immature technologies at start of development (Technologies at a Readiness Level below 6 1) ), despite the well known consequences (Programmes beginning development with mature technologies experiencing 33% less cost overruns than those with at least one immature technology 2) ) > This suggests that go/no gates should be complemented with specific management of WP encapsulating immature innovations, in parallel with the main development stream (eg. early transfer from R&T to Programme, specific steering at Head of Programme level) Early customer/operator involvement: Early customer/operator involvement is, in particular, key for moving > From a Capability Based Innovation (leverage of existing capability to enable new or superior satisfaction of known customer needs) > to Requirements Based Innovation (responding to newly emerged or previously unsatisfied customer needs) that is more likely to lead to industry paradigm changes and provide a breakthrough competitive advantage 1) demonstration in a relevant environment 2) base on a sample of US defence programmes

19 d. Vision of the A&D business environment in 2020 THE DEFENCE SECTOR IS DEALING WITH ITS MAJOR CURRENT CONCERN: BUDGET CUTS, WHEREAS THE CIVIL SECTOR MAY HAVE DIFFICULTIES IN DEALING WITH NUMEROUS TOPICS THAT ARE APPARENTLY OF EQUAL IMPORTANCE KEY CHALLENGES FACING THE CIVIL SECTOR [% ANSWERS] Others Becoming greener 2% 9% Protecting / increasing profitability & cash 11% Achieving ramp-up (production & supply chain) 26% KEY CHALLENGES FACING THE DEFENCE SECTOR [% ANSWERS] Others Achieving ramp-up (production & supply chain) Protecting profitability & cash Beating emerging competition 3% 1% 8% Increasing value for the customer 1% 1% Coping with external economic context (cycles, deregulation) 15% 16% Increasing value for the customer 20% Beating emerging competition 86% Coping with budget cuts Focus remains balanced between external (e.g. competition, economic context) and internal concerns (e.g. ramp-up, profitability) as it was in 2012 The number of topics of equal importance raises the question of companies' capacities to deal with all of them concurrently: which organization? Which governance and allocation of resources? Coping with governmental budget cuts is THE challenge of the defence sector (86% vs. 68% last year). The topic includes concerns regarding > short term budget decreases leading in particular to the deferral of deliveries to armed forces and subsequent cash impacts > low mid-term visibility due to unstable government policies/ forecasts and lack of major programmes in the coming decade In this context, preserving turnover/margins as well as sustaining know-how and funding innovation are major concerns for respondents

20 d. Vision of the A&D business environment in 2020 NEW TECHNOLOGIES ARE NOW SEEN AS A DRIVER OF INDUSTRY STRUCTURE, AS IMPORTANT AS EMERGING COMPETITION AND NEW BUSINESS MODELS TRENDS TO CHANGE INDUSTRY STRUCTURE IN 2020 [% ANSWERS] New technologies 26% 2012 results 18% Evolutions +8% The increase in the number of first class players was selected as the top driver of evolutions in industry structure in the 2011 and 2012 surveys, with New OEM business model ranking #2 New business models New end customer requirements New competitors from emerging markets Entry of new competitors from outside A&D 1% 24% 24% 24% 26% 21% 28% 7% -2% +3% -4% -6% With the relative competitive positioning of companies and programmes, in particular from emerging markets, becoming clearer and more stable, respondents now consider the 4 main drivers of the industry structure to be of equal importance This suggests that by selecting "New technologies" or "New business models", 50% of respondents believe they could influence the evolution of the industry structure instead of reacting to it ("New end customer requirements" and New competition from emerging markets") Internal factors External factors

21 OUR VALUE PROPOSITION: WE HELP CLIENTS CONDUCT STRATEGIC AND OPERATIONAL TRANSFORMATIONS STRATEGY/M&A OPERATIONS Corporate Strategy and Portfolio Management Services and Support Development Strategy Marketing/ Business capture Mergers & Acquisitions/ Alliances Corporate/ BU Organisation Redesign A&D COMPETENCE CENTRE > Ability to work with Top Management and operational teams > Expertise of core and functional processes of the Industry > Experience based on more than 30 projects p.a. since 2000 > Coverage of Commercial and Defence sectors Post Merger Integration R&D Efficiency/ Product Policy and Innovation Programme Management Efficiency Supply Chain Optimistation Purchasing and Supplier Management Optimisation Manufacturing Performance Optimisation

22 22 Amsterdam Barcelona Beijing Beirut Berlin Boston Brussels Bucharest Budapest Canton Casablanca Chicago Detroit Doha Dubai Düsseldorf Frankfurt Gothenburg Hamburg Hong-kong Istanbul Jakarta Kyiv Kuala Lumpur Lagos Lisbon London Madrid Manama Milan Montréal Moscow Mumbai Munich New York Paris Prague Riga Rome São Paulo Seoul Shanghai Singapore Stockholm Stuttgart Taipei Tokyo Warsaw Vienna Zagreb Zurich