Boeing 787
#3
Critics and not just union members were concerned with the massive amount of outsourcing that was occurring with the Boeing 787. It is debatable whether this criticism was fair since Boeing had its reasons to outsource so much of the 787’s work. These reasons include cost control, hopes to win orders from the countries in which they were outsourcing to, efficiency, and the difficult relations between Boeing and the labor unions. Critics were afraid of losing jobs are and knowing the fact that outsourcing technology is risky because the country where that work goes may copy your technology and expertise to use as its own. Critics claim outsourcing up to 70% of the work caused incompatibilities in design and execution. For example, the battery fires that caused emergency landings.
Many companies outsource, but Boeing may have gone too far with the 787. Some say that their core competencies were outsourced and that is very risky. When they got these parts back and started assembly they did not fit properly. Boeing now agrees that it outsourced too much. When the Seattle area increased employment and brought work back in-house that was an acknowledgment that something might be wrong with the massive amount of outsourcing that occurred. Even though America is still employed the most engineers for the 787, they outsourced a major part of their design process to nine other countries. They clearly outsourced their main competitive advantage. Since then Boeing has spent billions more dollars due to delays and defects.
Boeing should be honest as it seems that they were in admitting that too much work was outsourced. They stated that that will not happen again and their core competencies will be done at home. Being honest and making necessary changes to the problem parts should be enough to satisfy critics.