Same tools. Same year. Same industry. Opposite outcomes. Business Travel Show Europe just handed us the clearest picture yet of why some travel managers are getting pulled into the C-suite conversation — and why others, with identical technology, are stuck optimizing inside their current box. This week: the fault line, why it's sharper in Europe, and three things you can do about it before Friday.

There's one number from Business Travel Show Europe we can't get out of our heads: 38% and 38%.

BTN Intelligence surveyed 261 corporate travel managers on how AI changed their role. The results split cleanly down the middle: 38% said AI made their role more strategic. Another 38% said AI improved their efficiency — but didn't grow their influence. The remaining 24% were somewhere in between, or hadn't seen AI touch their work yet.

Same tools. Same year. Same industry. Opposite outcomes.

If you'd shown that survey to a room of travel managers three years ago, most would have guessed the split would fall along budget lines — bigger programs winning, smaller ones losing. It didn't. The split fell along a completely different fault line, and that's what this issue is about.

Aurélie Krau, who spent both days of BTSE running peer-to-peer Office Hours with the Corporate Travel AI Network, put it in one line that we haven't stopped repeating: "Same technology. Very different outcomes." Her observation, our lens.

The 38% who moved up didn't get better software. They got a better pitch. Every one of them — in Aurélie's reporting and in the conversations we've had with European travel programs this quarter — could answer this question in one sentence: what is our AI investment doing for the business?

Not "what does the tool do." Not "how much time it saves." What it does for the business — revenue enabled, risk reduced, employee retention, deal cycle, close rate.

The 38% who got stuck can't answer that. They can tell you their efficiency numbers (which are often excellent — auto-itemised expenses, 50 minutes saved per report, Nokia's ~750-of-1,500 auto-answered T&E queries a month), but efficiency is a cost-centre story. It doesn't move you up the org chart. It optimises you inside your current box.

Two reasons the fault line is sharper here than in the US market:

European travel programs were quietly folded into procurement in 2022–2023. In many companies, the travel manager now reports to a category lead who doesn't distinguish between air, ground, and printer paper. If your program looks like efficiency gains on a supplier-management dashboard, that's exactly where you stay.

CSRD Scope 3 reporting is turning your data into a board-level asset. For the first time, your business-travel emissions data is a compliance artifact, not a nice-to-have. The travel managers who see this — who can walk into an ESG committee meeting with clean, real-time flight-and-hotel emissions data and a plan — get pulled into the strategic 38% automatically. The others hand their spreadsheet to sustainability and go back to their inbox.

Three things, and none of them cost money.

• Rewrite your one-slide pitch. The one you'd give to your CFO if you had 60 seconds in the elevator. If your current pitch starts with "our program managed X% of trips through the OBT," you're pitching the tool. Rewrite it so the first sentence describes what the business gets. Same numbers can go in — as evidence, not as the point.

• Ask for your program's next AI decision to be reviewed with IT and finance in the room, not procurement. This one is political and worth it. The travel programs Aurélie flagged as pulling ahead — TomTom, Scania, Nokia — all did this. Scania went further and renamed "supplier management" to "supplier relationship management" internally. That word change signalled that the role was about shaping commercial relationships, not just cutting invoices. Ask for that meeting.

• Map what AI should let you stop doing. Aurélie shared a framework from BTSE that mapped ~46 distinct tasks in a typical travel manager's week. Only 5-10 were strong candidates for automation. That's the useful number. Not "what can AI do" — what should I stop doing so I have capacity for the strategic work that's actually moving my peers up.

The 38%/38% split isn't about talent or tools. It's about how you frame what you do — internally, this week, in the meetings you're already in. The travel managers pulling ahead didn't wait for permission to be strategic. They started pitching that way, and the org caught up. If you're inside the frustrated 38%, the fix isn't a bigger AI budget. It's a sharper sentence about why any of this matters to the business you work for.

Aurélie's full BTSE write-up has six more signals worth reading; her post is here. Send it to the peer on your team who needs to see it.

Save up to 20% on corporate travel with Travel Code’s powerful tech, no legacy systems, and personal service across flights, hotels, and more. ✈️ 💛

P.S.

New here? Check our Self-Booking travel platform and share it with your colleagues.