The Boeing Aircraft and Operations Management - Case Study Example

The delay of the Boeing aircraft has been a story long talked about by the media people, the industry heavy weights not to mention the potential customers of the Boeing aircraft, which had an astonishing demand of 350 787 Dream liners in the year they released their ambitious plan of building the magnificent plane. The most vocal of the complainers is the Japanese leading airline All Nippon Airways which had ordered 55 of the 787 air liners. (Wallace 2005) The story behind the delay has been long and people have had to contend with disappointing news concerning the release of the airliner. The delay has been a record seven years putting into doubt the ability of the Air liner manufacturer into question. However, for the profit oriented customers, the delay is usually viewed as incompetence. For management students, the problem is not really centered on technical incompetence, but more of the management of the processes leading to the final production of the aircraft. (Wallace 2005) On the other hand, still the manufacturing firm has its reasons for delays mainly eyeing required improvements, technical aspects and of concern, there is no single point where they look at their problem as originating from their management. As a management student, I learn that the final result is as much dependent on the planning of the tasks as it is on the coherence and harnessing of technical aspects of the project in question. This is the purpose of this study, to look at the problem facing Boeing from a management angle giving solutions based on this and particularly on project management. The study will therefore involve four parts of study which will look at the actual delays, causes of these delays, analysis of the problem experienced, how to avoid such situations in the future, how to limit the delays and finally make recommendations on the making of complex technological components in future . The delays The first roll out of the Boeing was supposed to be on July 2007; however, at the set time, the manufacturer released a statement stating that the designated launch of the complete plane would not take place at that time. The reason for this was given to be that some of the major and essential systems for the plane had not been installed at the time. Besides, the statement continued that the bonding of the plane was done by use of fasteners which were temporary and they awaited the required flight fasteners which had not been delivered at the time. (Barry 2006). Three months down the line, they gave another delay statement this time besides the fasteners; they also said that they had incomplete software making it impossible to carry out the launch. The second delay statement was given on October 2007 this time; the delay they said was as a result of a lapse in their supply chain. The supply chain incorporated both the domestic suppliers and the foreign suppliers. The items named as lacking due to the lapse were the fasteners; there was a problem with documentation released by the foreign suppliers and the software problem was also mentioned again as a cause for the delay. Note for the third delay, only one additional problem had been cited. The other two were recurrent problems. As a result of these delays, there were some dismissals most notable being the program manager. Their statement though read that the delays were not the cause for the dismissal. The third delay statement came on January 2008. This statement emphasized that no much progress had been made concerning the delay reasons cited earlier. Besides, they said that some of the processing that was initially to be carried out by their suppliers was to be done within its manufacturing center. To this they said that the surface for these processes still had some ground to be covered. Three months down the line that being on April 2008, Boeing issued a fourth statement still on delay. This time, no specific reasons for the delay were given but a look at the past happenings may indicate a strain on the finances or re route of effort. This was mainly because in March the same year, Boeing had set itself into buying Vought Aircrafts Industries in Global Aeronautic. Though this would have a positive impact on the manufacturer in the long run, it is apparent that the short term plans at the time were distracted due to a shift in focus. (Barry 2006).This was not noted though as a cause for delay but looking at the happenings at the time, it may be quite sound to make the assumption. On September 2008, the Boeing manufacturers faced another eminent delay due to a strike by the Boeing mechanist personnel. This lasted for two months or just about and it obviously led to a delay as the work of these individuals was left unattended for the duration of the strike. Another official delay was announced later that year on November. This time, the company cited improper installations of fasteners which were an essential process in the making of the aircraft. The fasteners problem was directly attributed to the strike a month back. At the end of the first quarter of 2009 which was the scheduled time for the launch of the first flight, the manufactures released a press statement acknowledging that the launch of the flight would not be possible and that the customers would have to wait for an additional three months to get their orders complete. Besides this, the press release also noted that the company was not to meet its target production of ten aircrafts monthly until the year 2013. (Wallace 2005) The launch of the first flight was thus postponed to around June at the time of the Paris Air Show. Unfortunately, the anticipated launch was not to take place; instead, the representatives at the show said that there were pending reinforcements on the side of the crafts body which was simply a structural problem. This marked a total of eight delays and finally no aircraft are available to at least nurse the customers who continue to curse as they had made massive investments in procuring the airliners as well as investments in advertising for potential customers in view of the increased capacity. The results of these delays were far fetched not only to the customers but also to the manufacturers. Besides, the reputation of the company as a renowned craft maker is now dented. The following part is going to critically look at the problems cited by the manufacture to be the result of delay. Besides, probable cause for the delays will be examined so as to offer a good understanding of the problem. Systems failure I may not be an expert in systems and how they fail or what makes them work but the little knowledge I have is enough to help me conclude that before embarking on a major structural work, there is a need to make a prototype. Prototype being a representation of the structure that is supposed to be made. This helps ensure that probable areas of failure within the project are looked at and avoided. Besides, the other way to minimize the chances of a system failure would be in the recruitment phase which ensures that only the best are involved in the making of a major project such as was the case with Airbus. The other last way to ensure that the system works is proper investment in sufficient funds that would ensure that only the best of the materials are used in the manufacturing or assembly of the parts. These do not represent an absolute way to guarantee a proper system but at least, they ensure a reasonable degree of success in any launch. It is improper to conclude that Boeing had not applied any of these but then, it is in order to assume that there must have been a flaw big enough to cause a delay as was the case. This problem would have been technical but also a failure in management could also have been reason enough to cause the delay that I have offered. It is probable that management failures could have led to the final lapse in the schedule (Wallace 2005) Fasteners The fastener problem was recurrent and a look at the initial planning stages of the Boeing assembly indicates that the suppliers of the materials required in the manufacture were both foreign and domestic. The fasteners were obviously subject to this supply chain which was not obviously functioning as it was supposed to. This prompts us to look at the various causes of delay in delivery of the manufacturing parts such as was the case with the fasteners. These causes it should be noted are not subject to the engineering field or other fields involved in manufacturing but are part of project management studies aimed at ensuring that projects are run properly and competently. One of the causes of delay could have been as a result of miscommunication between the manufacture in this case the Boeing and the suppliers. This may be in form of time or specifications. All suppliers are dependent on the manufacturer to give the required information of goods or materials required for certain processes; if this is not done, then delay or even improper processing is eminent. This may have been one reason for the delay in fasteners. The other reason for these delays may have been strained relationships between the manufacturers and the suppliers. These may emanate from pay disputes or goods processing. These two when they happen in the course of production may result to delays in delivery of material required for the production process. Processing of documents by foreign suppliers This was another problem cited by the manufacturing company and though it may have been genuine, it brings into question the competence of the suppliers and the communication of the manufacturing company. The assumption being that the paperwork was meant for goods or equipment already delivered, then it would not be a cause for delay; otherwise, the project management staff would have failed in their mandate of ensuring proper contractual engagements and clearance of paperwork to ensure the smooth running of the technical aspects of the process. Boeing Mechanics Strike This was the last and unique problem cited as the cause of delay. One of the major emphases of the management strategies is a conducive internal environment in any project. What this entails is that all the project participants and workers are well briefed and that the concerns of each are addressed before embarking on any assignment. This has two effects; one, it raises the motivational of the workers and secondly, it helps handle the internal politics whose result is go slows such as was the case with the Boeing mechanics. Thus, the problem of the strike solely falls within the project management personnel who failed to follow one of the most crucial management guideline in ensuring project successes. Solutions The solutions to these problems are more management than technical oriented. They include the following: Proper planning and hiring- this would ensure that the company only embarks on production with the most able workforce who are competent in their respective specialties. This would ensure that certain technical failures are avoided and that the production process has reasonable degree/chances of success. Proper panning on the other hand would ensure that the areas which matter most are given more time and that finances are availed in respect to sensitivity and need. (Norris et al 2005). Proper procurement committee- this would ensure that the procurement process is free of delays this would be enabled by ensuring two things happen. One is that the communication between the suppliers and the company is clear and efficient, eliminating unnecessary delays. The second role of the procurement department would be to ensure that proper processing of documents takes place and that guidelines on proper documents are communicated to the suppliers. Besides, it is the role of the procurement personnel to make sure that only competent and accomplished suppliers are enlisted; this would ensure cases of delay or paper work are eliminated. (Norris et al 2005). The last solution is proper management of the workforce which would ensure that there are no strikes or cases of unsatisfied workers. This would ensure that all listed roles and jobs are completed in due time. Limit delay Further delay can be limited by an examination of the highlighted areas of delay. This would entail implementing necessary changes as may have been highlighted under the solutions section. Qualified personnel, motivated workforce, proper investment in research, proper and efficient procurement personnel as well as competent suppliers would ensure that the delays are limited. An examination of the Airbus manufacturing indicates that the company had adopted more or less the same modalities as the Boeing did, decentralizing its operations such that different functions and part processing was spread all over Europe and the final assembly done in Toulouse France. For Boeing, the same was done spreading the different functions across its domestic and foreign suppliers and final assembly done in Everett, Washington. (Barry 2006).The question may then arise as to why the many delays if the same modalities were used The answer may be in choice of suppliers and internal organization of the Boeing management and it's investment in the project which has all been subject to the above discussion. Recommendations For any company undertaking major and new technological productions, a series of considerations has to be made to ensure the project succeeds. (Barry 2006). These considerations should be on the capacity of the company to make the necessary investments in regards to the project. This would involve a look at the funds, manpower, management capabilities and support groups such as the research personnel. The next thing would be a well researched and studied choice of suppliers and other partners. These are beyond the company but will determine the success or failure of the company projects. The last would be to look at the time frame and required resources which should then be matched to the internal resources as explained in the first point to ensure that all the outsourcing is done before the start of the project so as to avoid surprises and delays in the course of the project. References Barry, R and Heizer, J (2006) Operations Management, Prentice Hall. Kerzner, H (2002). Advanced Project Management: Best practices on Implementation 2nd edition, Wiley Publishers. Norris, G, Thomas, G and Forbes, C. (2005). Boeing 787 Dreamliner - Flying Redefined. Aerospace Technical Publications International Boeing's Big Dream, Fortune May 5, 2008 p.187 "Final Major Structure for Boeing 787 Dreamliner Delivered to Everett" Boeing press release. May 16, 2007. "Boeing's Big Dream", Fortune Magazine, May 5, 2008, p. 182. Leach, Yvonne and Gunter, Lori (2007). "Boeing Highlights Progress on First 787, Subsequent Airplanes". Boeing Press Release. http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2007/q2/070619c_nr.html, Retrieved November, 10, 2009. Boeing delays 787 Dreamliner delivery to late 2010 (2009) http://www.france24.com/en/20090828-boeing-delays-787-dreamliner-delivery-late-2010 Retrieved November, 10, 2009. Making of the Airbus A380: A triumph of science and engineering: http://www.icmrindia.org/casestudies/catalogue/Operations/OPER056.htm, Retrieved November, 10, 2009. Virginian Pilot (2008).Boeing 787 launch delayed again: more than year behind schedule bizworld:http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-177711920.html, Retrieved November, 10, 2009. James Wallace (2005). Boeing details 787 improvements: http://www.seattlepi.com/business/248827_boeing18.html, Retrieved November, 10, 2009. Major Assembly of first Boeing 787 Dream liner Starts (2006). http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2006/q2/060630a_nr.html, Retrieved November, 10, 2009. Read More