We ran a pilot with one carrier for a subset of their crew for maybe a year, but eventually failed to gain further traction. Very tough sales and implementation cycle in spite of the fact that we could convince many individuals (bothe crew and management with their competing concerns) of the benefits of our system.

In what way was it a tough implementation cycle? e.g. resistant to change, or outsourced (e.g. could not get close enough to the fire/ talk to the right people) or was it something else?

Would love to pick your brain because I can relate to what youre saying.

Integrating into the operations on a provisional evaluation basis is a whole lot of work and the stakes are high. As my grandpa used to say, "There's nothing easier than doing nothing." Both parties (our company and the airline) brought the right people to the table, but for the system to really be evaluated we needed an entire crew base to use the system in a "realistic" fashion. There was a fair bit of understandable skepticism about how the system would perform under the stress of real user input, but due to the overall complex nature of the system there was a non-trivial learning curve and lots of crew members didn't see a lot of value in spending their time help us put the thing through its paces. As an example, the system would allow crew members to specify a highly detailed, specific set of flight preferences that were either declared as ranked priorities and/or they could select specific flights. If a crew member was forced to "try" our system, they could put in a generic set of input ("I like the Vegas flight."). However, we suspected that once they were faced with the opportunity to share their real schedule, they would have a lot more incentive to put in a lot more particulars, which would stress our optimization engine differently.