3 ms·

It's so weird to me to separate strategic choices from execution. If you haven't a clue what a system can or cannot pull off, you cannot produce sound strategie

It's so weird to me to separate strategic choices from execution. If you haven't a clue what a system can or cannot pull off, you cannot produce sound strategies for it.

panick21_ 3y ago
And its not weird to separate strategic choice from execution. I am arguing against somebody that said the strategic choice should have been to develop 737 successor instead of 787. That's just strategy. They could have the same kind of production issues and execution issues in that plane as well. The 787 has fantastic product market fit, has good new technology in it and will be a cornerstone for Boeing for decades. The issues with 787 are production, not understanding what it can do. But despite those production issues, orders keep coming in.
- namaria 3y ago
  I meant the production system of Boeing. How can you say it was the right choice if they proved incapable of delivering it? Someone making strategic choices ought to know what the realities on the ground are. Otherwise it is meaningless to talk about correctness of strategy.
  - panick21_ 3y ago
    Again. Had the picked another product the would have had many of the same issue. Are you arguing they should have done nothing? Even with the production issues, they still had a peak production rate of 150 planes. And those issues arent limiting sales very much. So even with the production issues it was the right choice. The program just isnt quite as profitable as hoped. Still the right strategy.
    - namaria 3y ago
      The strategy of continuing with the 737 into the 2020s has causes numerous avoidable fatalities. The original point stands, it was a strategical failure. As OP comment said, they should have scrapped that platform. Rivals with more modern jets have superior products. You try to make a point it is the right strategy but execution was lacking. I respectfully disagree. The strategy of milking the obsolete platform was a bad choice.
      - panick21_ 3y ago
        > strategy of continuing with the 737 into the 2020s has causes numerous avoidable fatalities No that's not the fundamental reason. The strategy of continuing with the 737 could have been done in a save way. There is nothing inherent in the 737 that makes it fundamentally unsafe. > You try to make a point it is the right strategy but execution was lacking. I respectfully disagree. You haven't actually made the point at all. With 787 the execution was flawed. With 737 MAX the execution was even more flawed. You have only provided other examples of flawed execution. That doesn't prove the strategy was wrong. Doing the 787 also doesn't inherently mean you can't replace the 737. Boeing had enough money to do both as they have done before. Saying Boeing should have done some other strategy would likely also have resulted in flawed execution of some kind. Without the 787, they might have had to do a 767 MAX. And that 767 MAX could have also crashed if the execution was flawed. All you are doing is imagining a different strategy and then asserting that everything would have been amazing if that strategy had been followed.
        namaria 3y ago
        All I'm doing is saying the strategy of milking an obsolete platform was a poor strategy. Disagree all you want but don't make a strawman to debate against and pretend that it is me.

It's so weird to me to separate strategic choices from execution. If you haven't a clue what a system can or cannot pull off, you cannot produce sound strategies for it.

panick21_ 3y ago

And its not weird to separate strategic choice from execution. I am arguing against somebody that said the strategic choice should have been to develop 737 successor instead of 787. That's just strategy. They could have the same kind of production issues and execution issues in that plane as well. The 787 has fantastic product market fit, has good new technology in it and will be a cornerstone for Boeing for decades. The issues with 787 are production, not understanding what it can do. But despite those production issues, orders keep coming in.

namaria 3y ago
I meant the production system of Boeing. How can you say it was the right choice if they proved incapable of delivering it? Someone making strategic choices ought to know what the realities on the ground are. Otherwise it is meaningless to talk about correctness of strategy.
- panick21_ 3y ago
  Again. Had the picked another product the would have had many of the same issue. Are you arguing they should have done nothing? Even with the production issues, they still had a peak production rate of 150 planes. And those issues arent limiting sales very much. So even with the production issues it was the right choice. The program just isnt quite as profitable as hoped. Still the right strategy.
  - namaria 3y ago
    The strategy of continuing with the 737 into the 2020s has causes numerous avoidable fatalities. The original point stands, it was a strategical failure. As OP comment said, they should have scrapped that platform. Rivals with more modern jets have superior products. You try to make a point it is the right strategy but execution was lacking. I respectfully disagree. The strategy of milking the obsolete platform was a bad choice.
    - panick21_ 3y ago
      > strategy of continuing with the 737 into the 2020s has causes numerous avoidable fatalities No that's not the fundamental reason. The strategy of continuing with the 737 could have been done in a save way. There is nothing inherent in the 737 that makes it fundamentally unsafe. > You try to make a point it is the right strategy but execution was lacking. I respectfully disagree. You haven't actually made the point at all. With 787 the execution was flawed. With 737 MAX the execution was even more flawed. You have only provided other examples of flawed execution. That doesn't prove the strategy was wrong. Doing the 787 also doesn't inherently mean you can't replace the 737. Boeing had enough money to do both as they have done before. Saying Boeing should have done some other strategy would likely also have resulted in flawed execution of some kind. Without the 787, they might have had to do a 767 MAX. And that 767 MAX could have also crashed if the execution was flawed. All you are doing is imagining a different strategy and then asserting that everything would have been amazing if that strategy had been followed.
      - namaria 3y ago
        All I'm doing is saying the strategy of milking an obsolete platform was a poor strategy. Disagree all you want but don't make a strawman to debate against and pretend that it is me.