The Intentional Organisation - Issue #2
How do things get Intentionally Wrong?
1. How do things get Intentionally Wrong?
This week, the US House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, released its report on the Boeing 737 Max. The two accidents of Lion Air flight 610 in October 2018 and Ethiopian Airlines flight 302 in March 2019 led to the most extensive and most extended aircraft grounding ever experienced. The report concludes that
Technical design flaws, faulty assumptions about pilot responses, and management failures by both The Boeing Company (Boeing) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) played instrumental and causative roles in the chain of errors that led to the crashes
The themes identified
What were these management failures? The report identifies several issues.
There was enormous financial pressure on ensuring the Boeing 737 Max program could compete with the Airbus A320neo aircraft.
There have been faults in design, particularly on the MCAS system which was n to identified as safety-critical.
A Culture of Concealment was developed by Boeing, with the company withholding information from statuary agencies and clients.
There was a conflict of interest between Boeing and the FAA both in terms of representation and "influence". This led for example to too much delegation of oversight from the FAA to Boeing engineers.
It is evident that there is a vital organisation component behind, and probably a great illustration of what happens when putting profit before safety.
It also shows how management decisions take unintentional routes when not well thought. For example, the report outlines how internal documents reported already in 2013 that plans existed to avoid increasing costs by minimising the impact of the MCAS system. As this would have required additional training for airlines, its impact was not disclosed fully (up to the point that references to this system where removed from the manuals for the pilots).
Internal engineering supervision failed within Boeing, privileging the "business objective" and "profitability" side.
Many of the interviews pointed out about a culture change underpinning Boeing operations, that moved to be focused on financial benefit rather than technical solutions and innovation as a setting. This is evident from the fact that the new aircraft had technical issues since the beginning, most of them hidden or downplayed by Boeing.
When things go wrong... scapegoating
The investigation in the aftermath of the accident showed the typical pattern of scape-coating that follows an event where a rippled culture change happened. Boeing tried to blame pilots, airline maintenance, a software provider etc.
Production ramp-up came with many safety concerns raised by several employees. But no actions followed through. Boeing introduced "Countdown clocks" into the MAX program, ensuring these were visible by employees. The workforce was exhausted to match the delivery plans, yet the program continued. Several supervisors were genuinely concerned about the fact that serious process breakdown that could happen is employees were continued to be pushed to their limits.
The report concludes with a mandate to Boeing to "restore its reputation as a company focused squarely on safety and quality". They analysed that the company did both not things right nor the right things, showing failure in management and leadership.
What do we learn?
I share the view this report is essential reading for any HR and Company Executive. In a moment where ideas of agile working get diffused around the world as a way to better tackle efficiency and profits, what is the risk of giving up safety for lighter control and profits only?
This case shows the real effect of culture corrosion, where internal consistency moves the organisation into dangerous behaviours. Incentives entirely focused on production quotas and profit, have put in the second instance the relevance of safety and the engineering tradition of a recognised large corporation.
A clear example of how organisational awareness and internal consistency play a critical role in the way we manage our organisations. The action of every manager and leader has consequences, that we need to consider, thinking holistically and for the long term.
Would love to read your thoughts on this. Also, at the time of sending this newsletter, Josh Bersin has also published a long analysis of the report from the HR lens.
2. My Latest Posts
No Rules Rules: Netflix and the Culture of Reinvention is a book that many awaited. Since when, in 2009, Reed Hastings released the Netflix Culture…
Netflix is a clear example of Intentional Organisation. I have decided to start writing a few posts on examples of organisations to illustrate the…
Who are you, really? What makes you, you? Psychologists like to talk about our traits or defined characteristics that make us who we…
What are the Risks of Remote Working? Thinking what the risks of a fully flexible workforce are is a simple consequence of the current discussion.
HR Technology, HCM, HRMS, HRIS… many different topics to focus on the world of Technology associated with HR, yet is not always easy…
No Rules Rules: Netflix and the Culture of Reinvention by Reed Hastings & Erin Meyers explains the factors of its unique culture of Freedom and Responsibility
The Netflix Culture Deck became quickly famous back in 2009 when it was released in the public, outlining the revolutionary culture of Netflix.…
More Recent Posts
5 Reasons Why Remote Work won’t Last. Unless you take these actions.
3. Reading Suggestions
I've been shuffling a lot of reads on Remote Work this week, so most curated content is around this topic.
🏡 Will the home-office truly be the future? The Economist published a real thorough article on The Future of the Office. And concludes with one consideration: "the increased popularity of home-working puts pressure on laws which were constructed around the assumption that people would be toiling away in an office." #RemoteWork
🎒 A side aspect of Remote Working is about the young people that are starting their work experience in an "unknown" situation. An article from The Atlantic looks deeper this way: Generation Work-From-Home May Never Recover #RemoteWork
📉 Also unknown is the impact of the remote working transition to the so-called "office-economy". Steve LeVine paints a pretty bleak picture on Medium and some first data from Hamilton Project seem to show that low-pay wages are decreasing. #RemoteWork
🕵️♂️ With Remote Working on the rise, Employer Control is also hot topic. Christina Colclough in an interview claims it's time to track them back. How do we balance the right level of control? is there a right level of control? #RemoteWork
🚨 The Covid-19 outbreak has changed our assumptions about the world. How do you cope when everything keeps changing is the question that Cindy Lamothe asks on NYT. If Individuals feel they don't have a grasp on their future anymore, how can companies plan and work? #Change
🛵 Reinventing work means thinking not just of the top part of the knowledge workers, but also redefining Better Jobs. This is the theory of Zeynep Ton in a recent HBR article focused on the US. Also Knowledge Workers need to rethink the way they work, moving away from competency, and focusing on Agency. #FutureofWork
📚 Lars Schmidt has put together an excellent open source repository of resources on Remote Work, Equitable Organisations, and the impact on HR Operations. #FutureofWork
4. The (un) Intentional Organisation 😁
5. Keeping in Touch
Don’t hesitate to get in touch, either by responding to this newsletter directly, or by using the contact form on my blog.
I welcome any kind of feedback, both on this newsletter as well as, in general, on the content of my articles.
Find me also on: