Opinion article that author's thesis states stock buybacks and poor leadership led to the breaking of Boeing.

[GON]

The problems with the tanker program have been absurd given that Boeing built the 767 for decades and has built tankers for a few more.
Legacy Boeing would have never allowed this to happen.

Your post reminded me on how critical leadership is to everything at these levels.

A man passed away in the past year that ran a construction company in California that worked on major road projects. The contracts typically had a reward for finishing the job early. And I suspect in California quite a lot of bureaucracy in the inspection process.

It was reported this man's construction company finished a majority of these massive California road building projects ahead of schedule, some significantly finished early and to standard.

Leadership is the reason things get done on time and on target. And funny, the CEO of Boeing, who works from home quite a bit and has a full size Boeing private jet pick him up at home if he decides to go to the office, is still employed and makes eight figures per year with options and bonuses.

 

[edyvw]

When Boeing decides to move HQ back to Seattle, that would be sign that they are changing culture. They are still looking at this as they can patch, fix somehow, and move on. Reality is that they are one serious incident from real catastrophe.

 

[GON]

When Boeing decides to move HQ back to Seattle, that would be sign that they are changing culture. They are still looking at this as they can patch, fix somehow, and move on. Reality is that they are one serious incident from real catastrophe.

Boeing's recently announced HQ move from Chicago to the greater Washington DC area clearly speaks to where Boeing's leadership is looking to generate revenue and profits.

Your post is thought provoking. If I were Boeing CEO with the goal of making the world's safest, most reliable, most efficient commercial aircraft for the next 75 years, where would I move Boeing HQ to???

 

[edyvw]

Boeing's recently announced HQ move from Chicago to the greater Washington DC area clearly speaks to where Boeing's leadership is looking to generate revenue and profits.

Your post is thought provoking. If I were Boeing CEO with the goal of making the world's safest, most reliable, most efficient commercial aircraft for the next 75 years, where would I move Boeing HQ to???

They announced Arlington (I think) before door incident. If I was CEO, I would announced that HQ is moving back. That would be best signal to the public about their intentions. That might absorb fallout from future incidents. They are in situation where one incident, regardless how innocent it is, can wreck havoc on the company. But, I don’t think there is outside of the box thinking in the company.

 

[GON]

They announced Arlington (I think) before door incident. If I was CEO, I would announced that HQ is moving back. That would be best signal to the public about their intentions. That might absorb fallout from future incidents. They are in situation where one incident, regardless how innocent it is, can wreck havoc on the company. But, I don’t think there is outside of the box thinking in the company.

Just returning from a Sunday morning walk at about 33 degrees Celsius and direct sunlight. Good environment to ponder thoughts. I thought if I was CEO where would I move Boeing HQ to if the goal was to be the World's leader in commercial aircraft for safety, efficiency, and dependability.

Seattle is done, going to be a "Chicago" in the not-so-distant future. The only the Seattle currently has going for it is the continual migration of US citizens from East to West. Of note, I currently live in the greater Seattle area.

My informal assessment on where to move Boeing HQ to reach the above criteria would be to Southern California, or the Bay Area. Both locations are likely the highest per capita population of both STEM students and STEM graduates in the world, outside of numerous parts of China. It is well documented the challenges of conducting business in California. That still wouldn't negate the STEM rich population.in California that could be the key to Boeing achieving its goals.

 

[edyvw]

Just returning from a Sunday morning walk at about 33 degrees Celsius and direct sunlight. Good environment to ponder thoughts. I thought if I was CEO where would I move Boeing HQ to if the goal was to be the World's leader in commercial aircraft for safety, efficiency, and dependability.

Seattle is done, going to be a "Chicago" in the not-so-distant future. The only the Seattle currently has going for it is the continual migration of US citizens from East to West. Of note, I currently live in the greater Seattle area.

My informal assessment on where to move Boeing HQ to reach the above criteria would be to Southern California, or the Bay Area. Both locations are likely the highest per capita population of both STEM students and STEM graduates in the world, outside of numerous parts of China. It is well documented the challenges of conducting business in California. That still wouldn't negate the STEM rich population.in California that could be the key to Boeing achieving its goals.

It doesn’t have anything to do with STEM etc. I am talking about upper management being involved in operations going on on the floor. For Calhoun to “shake” hands with workers he has to sit on the plane and make 5hrs trip. Argument is that things started to go down with move to Chicago, that led to management being disconnected etc. You want trust back? Start by sharing bread with common folks.

 

[GON]

It doesn’t have anything to do with STEM etc. I am talking about upper management being involved in operations going on on the floor. For Calhoun to “shake” hands with workers he has to sit on the plane and make 5hrs trip. Argument is that things started to go down with move to Chicago, that led to management being disconnected etc. You want trust back? Start by sharing bread with common folks.

Then why not the 787 plant in Charleston?

As you posted about being on "the floor", Elon Musk did nail it sleeping in the TSLA plants for many months, and workers seeing this mega billionaire that gave up his personal comforts to be part of the solution. I have not seen indicators Boeing issues are because of its plant workforce. The issues appear to be founded from cost cutting at all levels to be as profitable in the immediate quarter and year.

STEM is the center of gravity for a commercial airline manufacturer. Just look at the CEO of Airbus- he is a STEM. IMHO as the STEM intern becomes the STEM new hire, becomes the STEM engineer department leader, becomes the STEM vice president, becomes the STEM CEO.
I think it is definitely worth an assessment- what impact does/ can a CEO have on a mega sized union workforce visiting with the union employees on a regular basis? I viewed Boeing issues as not a failure on plant union workers not doing their best- I suspect most do. My guess is it is a philosophical issue at Boeing and to have leadership that are STEM and deeply loyal to the long term as being the way forward for Boeing.

 

[edyvw]

Then why not the 787 plant in Charleston?

As you posted about being on "the floor", Elon Musk did nail it sleeping in the TSLA plants for many months, and workers seeing this mega billionaire that gave up his personal comforts to be part of the solution. I have not seen indicators Boeing issues are because of its plant workforce. The issues appear to be founded from cost cutting at all levels to be as profitable in the immediate quarter and year.

STEM is the center of gravity for a commercial airline manufacturer. Just look at the CEO of Airbus- he is a STEM. IMHO as the STEM intern becomes the STEM new hire, becomes the STEM engineer department leader, becomes the STEM vice president, becomes the STEM CEO.
I think it is definitely worth an assessment- what impact does/ can a CEO have on a mega sized union workforce visiting with the union employees on a regular basis? I viewed Boeing issues as not a failure on plant union workers not doing their best- I suspect most do. My guess is it is a philosophical issue at Boeing and to have leadership that are STEM and deeply loyal to the long term as being the way forward for Boeing.

Don't get me wrong about STEM, I understand what you saying, and I highly doubt Renton will have issues around it.

Renton is their historical place. Charleston is the same as Mobile for Airbus: cheap labor. Nothing else.

Problems won't be resolved just by CEO moving from Arlington to Renton. However, as the saying goes, perception is reality! As I said, Boeing is one serious incident away from catastrophe. That incident might not be their fault (remember DC10 in Chicago?) but again, perception is reality. Boeing will take decades to bring back confidence, and that is if they do things right. If not, be sure that in 20 years we will talk Airbus and COMAC. No one is untouchable or irreplaceable.
Moving back to Renton would signal the intent of upper management to change the culture, as you said, the philosophical path at Boeing.

 

[y_p_w]

Don't get me wrong about STEM, I understand what you saying, and I highly doubt Renton will have issues around it.

Renton is their historical place. Charleston is the same as Mobile for Airbus: cheap labor. Nothing else.

Problems won't be resolved just by CEO moving from Arlington to Renton. However, as the saying goes, perception is reality! As I said, Boeing is one serious incident away from catastrophe. That incident might not be their fault (remember DC10 in Chicago?) but again, perception is reality. Boeing will take decades to bring back confidence, and that is if they do things right. If not, be sure that in 20 years we will talk Airbus and COMAC. No one is untouchable or irreplaceable.
Moving back to Renton would signal the intent of upper management to change the culture, as you said, the philosophical path at Boeing.

I don't believe headquarters was ever in Renton. It was actually in Seattle next to Boeing Field at the time HQ officially moved to Chicago.

Boeing board blocks shareholder push to bring HQ back to Seattle

A longshot proposal sought to have the company move its headquarters back to Seattle, the city it left 23 years ago.

www.seattletimes.com

​

​

​

​

A jet passes over Boeing’s then corporate headquarters on Marginal Way in South Seattle. While Alexandria, Va.-headquartered Boeing’s corporate leaders decamped from Seattle in 2001, workers continue to use the former HQ building. (Tom Reese / The Seattle Times, 2001)​

 

[edyvw]

I don't believe headquarters was ever in Renton. It was actually in Seattle next to Boeing Field at the time HQ officially moved to Chicago.

Boeing board blocks shareholder push to bring HQ back to Seattle

A longshot proposal sought to have the company move its headquarters back to Seattle, the city it left 23 years ago.

www.seattletimes.com

​

​

​

​

A jet passes over Boeing’s then corporate headquarters on Marginal Way in South Seattle. While Alexandria, Va.-headquartered Boeing’s corporate leaders decamped from Seattle in 2001, workers continue to use the former HQ building. (Tom Reese / The Seattle Times, 2001)​

Sure, i am just generalizing, that area.

 

[SC Maintenance]

Then why not the 787 plant in Charleston?

As you posted about being on "the floor", Elon Musk did nail it sleeping in the TSLA plants for many months, and workers seeing this mega billionaire that gave up his personal comforts to be part of the solution. I have not seen indicators Boeing issues are because of its plant workforce. The issues appear to be founded from cost cutting at all levels to be as profitable in the immediate quarter and year.

STEM is the center of gravity for a commercial airline manufacturer. Just look at the CEO of Airbus- he is a STEM. IMHO as the STEM intern becomes the STEM new hire, becomes the STEM engineer department leader, becomes the STEM vice president, becomes the STEM CEO.
I think it is definitely worth an assessment- what impact does/ can a CEO have on a mega sized union workforce visiting with the union employees on a regular basis? I viewed Boeing issues as not a failure on plant union workers not doing their best- I suspect most do. My guess is it is a philosophical issue at Boeing and to have leadership that are STEM and deeply loyal to the long term as being the way forward for Boeing.

We full.

 

[y_p_w]

Sure, i am just generalizing, that area.

OK. I was just thinking Renton seemed a little bit too specific.