A flexible corporate travel program can give you all the benefits of a traditional program, but without the limitations.

Traditional corporate travel programs—while they have their place—aren’t for everyone. Some teams just aren’t going to get the full value out of a traditional program. Some Travel Managers may feel that they’re too limiting to really work for their teams’ travel needs.

However, if your organization is operating with no travel program at all, you may be missing out on some key benefits. You could be leaving money on the table. You might also potentially not be giving your Travelers the duty of care you’re expected to provide.

The answer? A more flexible corporate travel program can provide a greater level of convenience, alongside the latest technology and full service and support.

In this series, we’ll be exploring ways you can go about rethinking the traditional corporate travel program model. Here’s what you need to know and what you can expect.

Key Takeaways 

• There are many reasons why a traditional corporate travel program might not work for a team. Meanwhile, there are plenty of new, other options available.
• A traditional travel program is rooted in control, oversight and compliance.
• In contrast, a more flexible corporate travel program allows for greater Traveler freedom.

The Case for Change

There are many reasons why today’s business Travelers, as well as many organizations and their Travel Managers, feel that the traditional corporate travel program needs to be overhauled.

To start, legacy booking tools often frustrate Travelers. They’ve grown accustomed to booking personal travel with speed and ease—two words they might not necessarily use to describe their experiences with the booking tools they’re required to use at work. In particular, Travelers at tech companies may resist such rigid systems. When one’s business centers around the latest and greatest technological advances, you may not be exactly eager to rely on legacy booking tools that seem to be the antithesis of advanced.

Meanwhile, new (and often better) options are available, such as open, AI-powered and NDC platforms. These options can provide a greater level of flexibility, thus leading to a more flexible corporate travel program overall.

In the Business Travel News 2025 State of the Industry report, the publication was quick to point out how traditional managed travel isn’t, as they put it, “always at the forefront of technology innovation.” A quoted survey respondent within the report even mentioned that business travel booking tools haven’t really changed all that much since the 1990s.

One reason why the study found this kind of stalling and stagnation to be the case? A lack of comfort.

Travel Managers aren’t exactly comfortable with some tech solutions, particularly those powered by AI. When asked about their comfort levels with travel suppliers using AI to serve their travel program, Travel Managers ranked themselves at a 3.02 on a scale of 1 to 5. Meanwhile, nearly two-thirds of Travel Managers said that they’d not even explored using AI within their business travel programs.

What a Traditional Travel Program Looks Like

A traditional travel program definitely has its place, though, as mentioned. They center around company control and oversight, and require a strict level of Traveler compliance. This can lead to a higher level of duty of care. It can ensure that Travelers and Executives get the support they need, when and as they need it. Additionally, traditional travel programs make great use of supplier negotiations, which can lead to more cost savings.

What a Flexible Corporate Travel Program Looks Like

In contrast, a flexible corporate travel program relies less on control and oversight. Compliance still definitely matters, though, as do duty of care and maintaining costs. However, there’s less micromanagement, and Travelers enjoy more freedom to make their own decisions. For example, they can choose the booking channels that work best for them. Additionally, Travel Managers can choose to purchase the managed services that work best for their teams. That could be just tech or Travel support services or both.

This flexibility can lead to greater Traveler satisfaction, too. A recent SAP Concur Global Business Travelers Research Report shows that many business Travelers feel their ability to adjust trips, select preferred options or combine personal travel with work has become more limited, underscoring the challenge of balancing travel budgets with Traveler experience. Meanwhile, a similar theme appears globally, with international business Travelers also citing flexibility as a top concern, according to industry reporting from TravelPulse.

Introducing the Rethinking Travel Programs Series

In this series, we’re going to be exploring just how you can begin rethinking the corporate travel program, so you can make the best decisions for your team.

First, we’ll look at in-house travel programs, an option that’s growing in popularity, particularly with SMEs and startups. We’ll explore the benefits, drawbacks and best practices.

Then, we’ll examine tech-first travel programs. What does it mean to truly be “tech-first”? What are the benefits and risks of this approach and how does the Travel Manager fit in?

Next, we’re discussing how you can make sure that a flexible travel program balances Traveler choice with safety and compliance. A flexible travel program isn’t a Traveler free-for-all.

Lastly, we’ll touch on the role a traditional corporate travel program can still play and how you can decide if you should go the flexible route or with a more traditional model.

Rethink Your Travel Program

Traditional corporate travel programs aren’t the only option. In this series, we’ll explore DIY travel programs, tech-first travel platforms and how to build corporate travel program flexibility that works for both your company and your Travelers.

Read our first blog in this series, on in-house travel programs, now.

JTB Business Travel may reference reporting or research published by Northstar; however, all commentary and recommendations in this article are independently developed.