BOEING CRASH LEADERSHIP CASE STUDY

INTRODUCTION

This essay will be based on the Boeing documentary ‘Downfall: The Case against
Boeing’ (Leahy, 2022). The essay will identify the problematic situations concerning
a documentary which contributed to the crash. The essay will further evaluate how
human psychological theories could have improved the effectiveness of problem-
solving and decision-making in the company.

The Boeing Company experienced a plane crash of Two Boeing 737 MAX aircraft
within six months killing about 356 passengers on board. The root cause of the
problematic situation concerning this essay was human and not financial or
technical. The decision-making process is the steps taken by an individual to
ascertain the best option to be taken to meet their needs (Burns & Brush, 2020). The
problems are enlisted as follows;

Firstly, On the Boeing 737 MAX there was an economic problem brought forth by
management that 737 engines consume lots of fuel so they should install more
efficient engines with big fans to make the 737 MAX. Schaper (2019) indicated that
Boeing used to listen to its employees' opinions because they had the conviction that
passengers' and shareholders' security and safety were paramount to them.
However, this corporate culture began to shift from inclusivity to concealment as they
developed the 737 MAX. From the human psychological theory, this is anchoring
bias. According to Hicks (2004, p.1), "decision-making consists of making the best
choice from the known options, whereas problem-solving is the process of creating
the options”. In an anchor bias theory, the mind disproportionately weighs the first
information it receives and the initial impressions, and estimates influence the
judgements and thoughts (Hammond et al., 1989). Concerning business, the anchor
focuses on past event and trends and based on these, the organisation of leadership
adjust based on the factors of the trend.

Secondly, there was a problem with cutting down the cost of fuel thereby introducing
the 737 MAX as an alternative. The intention of the company to reduce fuel costs by
introducing 737 MAX as an alternative was guided by an anchoring bias. This
resulted in the company paying a lot more for damages through the crash and
spoiling its reputation. The best approach they should have used was to view the
problem from different perspectives instead of sticking to only one approach. Also,
the management could have used the open-minded approach which seeks
information and opinions from lots of people to push the solution in a good direction
as these are initiatives used in countering the anchoring bias.

Thirdly, Boeing had systems engineering problems. “During the course of developing
the MCAS, there was a systems engineering problem. Boeing wanted the simplest
possible fix that fit their existing systems architecture so that it required minimal
engineering rework, and minimal new training for pilots and maintenance crews”
(Zweifel & Vyas, 2021). Due to its focus of Boeing in accruing more profit and
ignoring any obstacle or challenge to make things right, they avoided training pilots
on the new aircraft system because it would have been expensive, claiming that if
pilots knew how to use the old model, the new model would be simple (Devine &
Griffin, 2019). Boeing, in particular, claimed that if one pilot knows how to fly one
MAX plane, he can fly any model without any training (Barbaro, 2019). Then, to
improve sales and save expenditures, Boeing laid off almost 12,000 people while
expecting much more from the rest with lesser labour (Shepardson, 2020).

This is a heuristic factor of human psychology. In decision-making, people are

unlikely to investigate the subconscious and unconscious drivers of the actions taken
to determine the results they might obtain (De Haro, 2018). This is because it is
sometimes regarded as intangible or out of sight. This happens most especially
when a company reaches a height where they do not consider themselves to fail
anymore. The heuristic theory is a shortcut to solving a problem where there is no
exact solution or the time to obtain the perceived solution might take too long (De
Haro, 2018). The heuristic theory tends to focus on speed over accuracy so mostly
the solution is not optimal. In the case of Boeing, they had to develop a new systems
architecture for the 737 MAX but they realised it will cost them time and money and
management was not willing to spend making them opt for the simplest possible fix
to avoid engineering rework and minimal new training for pilots and maintenance
crews. This is a human factor because when they realised they need to re-engineer
the 737 MAX architecture and engines, they should have considered the cost
involved and planned adequately to become successful.
This decision process has proven positive in various airlines of which Boeing
Company has benefitted from carefully planned decision-making when they began
their operations. Before 1970, Boeing was an airline which focused on the safety and
security of its passengers and shareholders thereby giving the service users
confidence to trust their lives and resources in the management (O'Connell, 2020).
During this time, the employees’ voice was taken into consideration until 1970 when
the organisational culture began to shift unexpectedly and the management focused
solely on making a profit and maintaining their market share and ignoring intangible
factors which led to the plane crash (O'Connell, 2020).

An interview in New York Times granted an employee called Swampy indicated that
there is some form of pressure on the factory floor always. Swampy noted his role as
an inspector so he was called to inspect an aeroplane to ensure nothing was
defective before it set off. Swampy reported that 3-inch long titanium slivers were
laying around wires controlling the aeroplane. This could cause a fire because the
metal could migrate to power and if it is at a higher height above 40,000 ft., then a
problem will emerge. He reported the issue to his manager but was taken off the
plane and the plane was given to another to inspect for it to move. The issue
according to him was not cleaned (Barbaro, 2019). Other whistle-blowers noted that
there is a lot of pressure in Boeing to meet the schedule and the superiors of the
managers judge them based on the number of jobs they can complete in an hour
and incentives are given for not reporting defects (Barbaro, 2019). Anyone who
reports defects, that defect is held against them.

Again, there was an airframe problem in the Boeing 737 MAX. Boeing management
wanted to use the Boeing 737 airframe to avoid the excess cost. This is because the
737 MAX requires more ground clearance with bigger engines compared to the 737.
From the architecture, they knew that the 737 design cannot be practically
remodified to have taller landing gear. The humanistic theory presupposes that
humans must be recognised and there must be value placed on humans and respect
accorded (Harnish and Wolkholtz, 2001, p.45). The theory clears that the
unconscious mind and the environment determine the person's mind. This is there to
guide a person to choose their behaviour by granting freedom instead of relying on
the contingencies of the environment and external factors.
Boeing management operates a venture that needs to regard humans and value
them to ensure they are safe and secure. In ensuring that, they will adversely gain
profit. This has always been their way of life until they began to value money over
human life. Fuller (2008, p.67) indicated that the presence of a human is the most
important thing and not their future or past existence. This should have been applied
to the management practice. It would have aided them to create more ground
clearance to mount the engines instead of mounting the engine higher and more
forward as an alternative solution.

Furthermore, Boeing also had a maintenance practice problem which has been
compounded. The problem of maintenance practices led to the crash of the airline.
This is also a human error which can be attributed to a problem of cognitive ease.
According to Krämer & Kahneman (2013), cognitive ease focus on the familiarity
people uses in approaching situations. Cognitive ease measures how information is
processed in the brain. Krämer & Kahneman (2013) indicate in the book titled
thinking, fast and slow that the brain has two modes of thinking. The first thinking is
automatic and quick and one does not need effort. The second system of the method
of thinking requires the owner of the brain to participate fully and actively (Krämer &
Kahneman, 2013).

The pioneering management and the crew that used the plane earlier is a major
contributor to the crash. The crew experienced a maintenance practice problem but
failed to record the problem in the maintenance log book. The inspection team and
management team should have also looked at the aircraft for any perceived
problems before setting off. With the use of cognitive ease theory, it can be seen that
laziness and the feeling of both management and crew to have lots of choices
options and think they are familiar with situations. If they had understood the theory
of cognitive ease to realise that there are situations that need not be presumed to be
familiar and had worked on maintaining their aeroplanes, the crash could be
avoided.

Also, there was pilot training problems and pilot expertise problem. It has been noted
that the pilots on the plane were not told about the MCAS. Although there was an
emergency AD issued yet none of the pilots had undergone some training on what to
do in the event of failure. However, if the pilots had been trained and given expert
knowledge they would have correctly and quickly identified the problem and would
not have crashed by running the stab trim runaway checklist. Using risk aversion and
emotional framing to evaluate the case documentary, it could be seen that the
management was not having any bad feelings about the loss of the victims. The
reason is that when the first crash happened, they would have opted to train the
pilots on the use of the aeroplane to curb the situation from repeating. This never
happened. The crash happened another time before they brought up the training for
pilots on the use of the aeroplane. Kahneman (2013, p.284) indicates that if
someone fears to loose £100, then the hope of the person to risk and gain £150 is
averse.

Boeing's inability or unwillingness to risk some amount to train the pilots on the new
systems in place and how to operate them brought about their risk to gain more
popularity and trust in the market and shareholders. It has been noted that Airbus
entered the market with a unique aeroplane which had maximum fuel efficiency
(Gelles et al., 2019). Airlines began to opt for their plane because Airbus was known
to have the ability to produce aeroplanes with reduced costs. This made them
become one seller in the market in the year 2010 attracting a huge amount of orders.
Airbus had a culture with a focus on giving shareholders the best engine, reducing
fuel consumption, and giving the people the ability to trust the plane (Gelles et al.,
2019). They had a history of succeeding in new aircraft design.

On the other hand, Boeing could not design new planes and the concept of
maximizing fuel efficiency. The company was known for making profits and this was
reflected in the economy of America. When they realised Airbus had introduced the
737, they wanted to overtake the market by introducing the 737 MAX which their
culture of concealment failed (Gelles et al., 2019). The reason for Airbus's success
was the culture of inclusivity. Risk aversion clearly shows that they knew of the risk
involved because they did not design a new aeroplane but decided to innovate an
old plane version.

In conclusion, the problematic situation that caused the plane crash of the Boeing
737 MAX was human error. The humanistic theory has made known what went
wrong in the decision-making process and how the organisation could have curbed
the situation effectively if they had approached the issue using heuristics, cognitive
ease, and the anchor bias approach.

References

Barbaro, M. (2019) The whistle-blowers at Boeing, The New York Times. The New
York Times. Available at:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/23/podcasts/the-daily/boeing-dreamliner-
charleston.html (Accessed: January 5, 2023).

Boeing 737 MAX: What went wrong? (2019) BBC News. BBC. Available at:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-47553174 (Accessed: January 5, 2023).

Burns, E. and Brush, K. (2020) What is a decision-making process?, Business

Analytics. TechTarget. Available at:
https://www.techtarget.com/searchbusinessanalytics/definition/decision-making-
process (Accessed: January 5, 2023).

De Haro, S. (2018) “The heuristic function of duality,” Synthese, 196(12), pp. 5169–
5203. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-018-1708-9.

Fuller, C. (2008). Self-Actualization: Living Up to Your Full Potential. Web.

Gelles, D. et al. (2019) Boeing was 'go, go, go' to beat Airbus with the 737 MAX, The
New York Times. The New York Times. Available at:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/23/business/boeing-737-max-crash.html
(Accessed: January 5, 2023).

Hammond, J.S., Keeney, R.L. and Raiffa, H. (2006) The hidden traps in decision
making. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review.

Harnish, J. Wockholtz, B. (2001). Humanistic Psychology Overview: Association for

Humanistic Psychology. Web.

Hicks, D. R.; Thomison, P. R. (2004). Corn management. In: Smith, C. W.; Betrán,
J.; Runge, E. C. A. (Eds), Corn: Origin, History, Technology, and Production. P: 481-
522. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Leahy, J. (2022) Downfall: The case against Boeing - reviewed, Royal Aeronautical
Society. Available at: https://www.aerosociety.com/news/downfall-the-case-against-
boeing-reviewed/ (Accessed: January 5, 2023).

Schaper, D. (2019) Boeing's cultural shift, NPR. NPR. Available at:

https://www.npr.org/2019/10/26/773675393/boeings-cultural-shift (Accessed:
January 5, 2023).

Shepardson, D. (2020) Boeing cutting more than 12,000 U.S. jobs, thousands more
planned, Reuters. Thomson Reuters. Available at:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-jobs-idUSKBN2332EP (Accessed:
January 5, 2023).

Shepardson, D. (2022) U.S. wants revised pilot training after Boeing 737 max
crashes, Reuters. Thomson Reuters. Available at:
https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/us-tells-pilots-focus-flightpath-
management-even-autopilot-2022-02-02/ (Accessed: January 5, 2023).

Zweifel, T. and Vyas, V. (2021) “Crash: Boeing and the Power of Culture,” Journal of
Intercultural Management and Ethics, 4(4), pp. 13–25. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.35478/jime.2021.4.03.