Boeing says learned from outsourcing issues with 787

CHICAGO | Thu Jan 20, 2011 8:06am EST

CHICAGO Jan 20 (Reuters) - Boeing Co (BA.N) tried to do too much with outsourcing and other innovations in developing its 787 Dreamliner, the company acknowledged in a Reuters special report published on Thursday.

Employees and some aerospace experts say the complex global partnerships behind the Dreamliner have eliminated and displaced U.S. jobs, diminished the value of U.S. engineering delayed the aircraft by nearly three years.

"We made too many changes at the same time -- new technology, new design tools and a change in the supply chain -- and thus outran our ability to manage it effectively for a period of time," the company said in written response to Reuters questions for the special report. "In short, we have learned, and we are applying our learning."

The world's second-largest plane-maker has promised to bring more of the design work back in-house for the next version of the lightweight carbon-composite plane.

But Boeing insists its global approach to manufacturing keeps it competitive with rivals and insulates the U.S. job market from the shocks of the highly cyclical airplane business.

To read the full special report in multimedia PDF format, click here:

link.reuters.com/vez27r

Reuters clients can see the full text of the special report here: [ID:nN18136549] (Reporting by Kyle Peterson; editing by Claudia Parsons)

Stocks
Markets
Industrials

Related Quotes and News

Company
Price
Related News
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (2)
GlassKnees wrote:
So, Boeing learned that making too many changes at the same time, employing new technologies and trying to manage many suppliers with different cultures, made it impossible to manage the program? This sounds remarkably similar to another Boeing fiasco: Future Combat Systems, a program that was cancelled by the DoD. In both cases, Boeing took on an extremely complicated program, tried to manage multiple suppliers, relied on unproven technologies, tried to adhere to an extremely optimistic schedule, and ended up wasting millions and seriously damaged it’s credibility. One has to wonder how competent Boeing senior management is – perhaps they should enroll in some remedial Business Management classes?

Boeing may have learned some lessons, but one has to wonder if the company will change accordingly? Or, like it did with its ethics issues, continue to blunder along making similar mistakes? Personally, I no longer care – I dumped my shares of BA – the 787 is no longer my NightmareLiner.

Jan 20, 2011 10:09am EST  --  Report as abuse
AnotherReality wrote:
Another great article exploring the truth of the 787. Boeing always gets down to claiming that it can only survive in the international arena by allowing the nations of its customers to share in the manufacture of the aircraft. Look at the huge portion of the project that is manufactured in Italy. See if you can find an order from an Italian airline, if there are any left. And the Italian company is the greatest thorn in the side of the program. I remember their leader coming on TV in Seattle to declare how totally competent they were. And I remember the 200+ Boeing engineers and a vice president that were sent to dig them out of their hole. They obviously did not dig far enough. The history of Alenia and composite components was well known within Boeing.

Virtually every problem that has shown up on the 787 was clearly seen by people within Boeing before it was recognized by the program. It was the enforced silence and refusal to listen that resulted in the current situation. Problems are still being recognized in a serial manner only when they become unavoidable. How many more will there be?

Jan 20, 2011 11:04am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.
See All Comments »