Hello, again, readers! We have two blog entries this week. This one will be about the company for which I work and the strategies it has employed through the years.
Last summer, my company celebrated its 100th anniversary. Its history is well documented and the number of times it has been near bankruptcy, only to go on to greatness is more than a handful. As world economies have changed and breakthroughs in technology have occurred the company has changed the way it operated.
Recently, the organization that I am assigned to was reorganized in a manner that Obolensky described in Chapter 3 (2016). We moved from a very silo-like structure to a matrix organization. The change occurred very recently and therefore, the jury is out as to whether it will remain, or we will snap back into silos and have to try again. However, given the environment in which we find ourselves, changing to a matrix organization will be essential to becoming far more capable of reacting to market changes.
Will we be able to move toward a Complex Adaptive System (CAS)? (Obolensky, 2016) The cards are stacked against us on a few fronts. The first being that we operate in highly regulated industries. There is a myriad of rules within which we must operate and often have little ability to influence. Because of the regulations, we are often required to have a built-in hierarchy and that inhibits the ability to evolve into a CAS. We are also a company steeped in chains of command and responsibilities. We work with the militaries of the world and tend to reflect their structure, at times. Our size is detrimental to evolving into a CAS, too. Changing the culture of a company of over 130,000 employees would take years (Wartzman, 2012, p. 2).
I believe, because many of the players in the new organization structure came from the silo-based structure, it will be difficult for the matrix to remain in shape this go-around. However, the demands of the market and the capabilities of our competitors, many who are smaller, will require us to make the shift. We can’t react at the speed our competitors appear to be able. We can bring to bear a very capable research and development team and knowledge of years of production that smaller competitors may not have.
When it comes to strategy, Boeing has changed their plans many times. Sometimes the changes were painful and sometimes they have been examples of strategic excellence. Our strategy is influenced by so many forces over which we have no control, we spend many hours on forecasts and reviews of historical averages. We spend a lot of time in the traditional area of Reeves’ strategic chart (2014). We look for opportunities based upon what we know and what our customers are asking for us to build. Where we have made a name for ourselves is when we venture into the visionary and shaping areas of Reeves’ chart (2014, 08:30). Whether it was the Bombers we have built that changed the advantage to the allies in battle, the amazing gamble that was the B747, the move to large twin-engine airliners (the 767 and the 777) and the re-writing of the rules of long-distance air travel, or the decision to change how we build airliners, the material we use, while changing the main systems to make the 787 we have had to change our strategy. In doing so, we have watched our competitors change their strategy to keep up. Recently, Boeing has found itself in the uncomfortable spot of reacting to its competitors. The change in the organization structure is part of the way we have decided to move and regain the position as a leader in the aerospace field.
Looking ahead 10 years, I believe Boeing will look different. There are several new competitors entering the field of building airliners and we will have to adapt our form and strategy to maintain our position of leadership. We will have to expand our fields of expertise and take on new challenges to build market share and revenue. We are expanding our products to help the USA get astronauts to Mars and will be at the forefront of the move toward pilotless aircraft. I hope to be playing a major part in one, or more of those programs as a Vice President leading a high performing team into the future!
Institute, TED. (Producer). (2014). Martin Reeves: Your Strategy Needs a Strategy. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YE_ETgaFVo8
Obolensky, N. (2016). Complex Adaptive Leadership (2nd ed.). London and New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
Wartzman, R. (2012, September 25, 2012). If Self-Management Is Such a Great Idea, Why Aren't More Companies Doing It? Forbes.
No comments:
Post a Comment