A Leader’s Perspective on Boeing Problems
Three days ago, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued urgent safety recommendations to both Boeing and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) – the reason is potential risk from jammed or restricted rudder control system on two aircrafts: the 737 Next-Generation and 737 Max 8 aircraft.
Another issue with Boeing aircrafts? Really? Again?
Over the last 2 years, Boeing has been hit with a series of issues, continuously expanding in impact and count. Analysts and customers wonder if any of these issues will go back to their original dimensions. Boeing has 40.6% market share of global commercial aviation aircrafts. No need to explain how big this number is.
What are examples of Boeing’s problems?
Quality & Safety Issues: To name one of many, the problem with the 737 Max fuselage (plane body) had a negative domino effect on deliveries to Boeing clients. Spirit Aero system, one of Boeing key suppliers, had their own quality control issues; another headwind to the timely production of 737 Max. According to Forbes, last January, and after incident on Alaska Airlines flight, the metal door plug that flew off in midair was reinstalled at a Boeing factory without several key bolts. And the list continues.
Human Resources: Throughout September 2024 around 33,000 machinists went on strike due to issues on pay; the union representing the workers has still not reached an acceptable deal to all parties. The impact was confirmed delay in production of Boeing aircrafts for current and future deliveries.
Delay in Certification of New Aircrafts: The 777x certification is delayed. In turn, this new aircraft will not enter service before 2025 or even later. Overall, increased regulatory oversight is becoming tighter on Boeing. The impact is weakening Boeing position versus Airbus and, no doubt, dropping its revenue growth projections.
Financial Issues: The 2023 production delays had negative impact on growth numbers. In addition, the delays created more unexpected costs from re-work and thus creating new holes in the company’s financial statements.
Finally, Boeing’s CEO will step down by end of 2024. The Chief Executive of the Commercial Airplanes division has already left the company with immediate effect last March.
Classification of Problems – Leadership Perspective
This article does not intend to prepare a seven steps approach to resolve Boeing issues by March 2026 😊. The number, intensity and depth of issues over a relatively short period of time are all indicators of a long recovery period ahead of the aviation giant. The intent is to provide leaders with an approach to classify problems and focus on how we reflect on them before teams jump into problem solving using programmed mindsets. I see this approach critical to upgrading a leader’s capability to address problems. Leaders are usual under pressure to find a set of viable solutions; however, this can derail them from investing the right time to think about problems.
So are Boeing problems tame, complex or wicked? Let’s understand this classification.
A TAME problem is well defined – no ambiguity. The solution is clear because we are crystal clear regarding the cause. Tame problems are solved in a linear manner through techniques that are repeatable and sequential. Expertise is critical to solve tame problems. Rarely, there are unintended consequences when we implement the solution. Examples: Changing a flat tire, adding a validation check on a mandatory data field, managing the queue of customer inquiries in a call center.
A COMPLEX problem is not as straightforward because it usually has multiple causes, some ambiguity surrounds our understanding and, unfortunately, our solutions might trigger a domino effect of other problems and unintended consequences (that we might have overlooked). Characteristics of the problems can be clear, but there are many potential solutions. Expertise helps but is not enough. Examples:Traffic jams, drug abuse, global supply chain issues and raising children.
A WICKED problem is complex but with clear disagreement on defining the problem itself. The concept was first introduced by two researchers Rittel and Webber in 1976. In this context, we are also not sure about what is a right or wrong solutions. Learning from prior successes is not enough to pull the solution closer – every wicked problem is unique. Examples: Climate change, rare diseases, nationwide poverty and relationships between entities or people.
So how do we apply this classification to Boeing issues?
Three examples should demonstrate the application.
1. The machinists / union conflict with Boeing over workers entitlements is a complex one. While the root cause(s) are identified, the proposed solutions were not satisfactory to both parties. There has been more than one iteration to reach an agreement so far, but this is still work in process. Why? Perhaps it’s the unintended risks (over years) that are making stakeholders nervous. There will be always be tendency to “let’s look for another solution” – which can make it borderline wicked as well.
2. Relationship with regulatory bodies has now checked many wicked boxes. The situation includes safety issues, quality issues, software flaws that might have led to fatal crashes, lack of trust between internal and external stakeholders and uncertainty of Boeing’s capability to find and implement solution(s). The possibility of hidden factors in this situation is no doubt high.
3. Supply Chain and Operational Challenges represent complex problems. The root causes can be identified, however, it’s a long list that are interdependent and dynamic. Supply chain is a system with many moving parts. The 787 dreamliner supply chain is an enduring case of complexity. Keeping up with the movements while improving the performance of the system (through solutions) requires investment in high performing teams and technical capabilities until the situation is resolved. Even for a company like Boeing, his is not always possible.
Final word to the leaders of today and tomorrow . . .
The rate of complexity in our world is accelerating. Going back to QMS documentation or SOPs solves a few issues, especially linear ones. Finding a problem that requires a linear approach to resolve is a luxury. As complexity grows, good-enough thinking skills are hardly satisfactory.
Leaders should spend time first to understand what they are getting into.
Is this problem tame, complex or wicked? What makes it more wicked than others? What is the main source of complexity? Is there a bias that is feeding the exaggeration? Do we have a common definition of the problem? Will this be a quicksand situation? Should we even solve this problem now? If the problem is extremely wicked, what are the other options?
The above questions are far from linear thinking and sequential implementation of solutions!
Leaders need to be confident about the CONTEXT.
Context defines the circumstances surrounding actions or ideas; without understanding these circumstances, business leaders will consistently generate flawed viewpoints – and probably invest in wrong solutions.
References
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/25/boeing-ceo-board-chair-commercial-head-out-737-max-crisis.html#
https://nypost.com/2024/09/28/business/ntsb-issues-urgent-safety-alert-on-boeing-737-rudder-system
http://www.drbrd.com/problems_and_solutions/three_types_of_problems.html
