The Airbus Program - National Champions, European Project, Global Player

AIRBUS
From the National Champions and the
European Project to the Global Player
Human Resources and Organization
Prof. Dr. Edgar Bellow
13th March 2012
Reims - France
Dr. Daniel Stanislaus Martel
Lecturer at University of Management, Economics and Finance, Geneva, Dunya Institute of Higher
Education, and AKAD Banking & Finance, Zurich and Berne
Aerospace Journalist & Editor/Consultant

2
AIRBUS?
You said Airbus?
Professeur Dr. Edgar Bellow
13th February 2012
Source: Skyward.ch
© Dr. Daniel Stanislaus Martel
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com

3
AIRBUS?
You said Airbus?
13th February 2012
Source: Skyward.ch
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com

4
AIRBUS?
You said Airbus?
13th February 2012
Source: Skyward.ch
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com

What do You Know About Airbus?
 Please help
 Discuss for five minutes in groups
 Nominate a representative
 Report to your colleagues in one minute
 The floor is yours
5
AIRBUS?
You said Airbus?
13th February 2012
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com

Facts about Airbus
 Airbus is…
 Number one in civil airframe orders (1419) and delivies (524) in 2012
 Known as an economic venture with market share of 64 % in 2012
 Considered a prime technology driver
 Presented as a European success story with 11.570 orders and 7079 del.
 Renown as a Global Player with 6659 aircraft in service
 … yours to learn from
7
AIRBUS?
That’s Airbus!
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

Agenda
 Airbus in it’s world
 The world of air transport (demand: operators / supply: airframers)
 Aerospace as a strategic industry
 The Airbus Case
 A changing framework: European integration (optional)
 The world around everything: Globalization and Neoliberalism
 Looks into the future
 Many case studies
8
AIRBUS?
That’s Airbus!
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS?
That’s Airbus!
Learning Objectives
 After our course, you are able to…
 … outline the historical agenda of the Airbus programme
 … explain at least three major influences on the Airbus
programme
 … apply at least three concepts to your own operations
 … it is up to you! 9
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

Why is this Important for You?
 As a future Reims Management School Graduate, You…
 … need to be aware of possible roles of stakeholders in
economics
 … need to be aware of the importance of a long term vision
translated into decisions
 … need to be aware of the role of technology in economics
 … it is up to you!
10
AIRBUS?
That’s Airbus!
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
The World of Air Transport
Demand: Operators / Supply: Airframers
13th March 2012
Reims - France

 Three clusters of actors
 Aircraft operators in demand for airframes
 Airports / ground facilities which serve aircraft operators
 Airframe constructors which supply airframes
 Perfectly complementary… and highly regarded / regulated
12
AIRBUS
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
Aircraft Operators (1)
 An industry set for growth (source IATA)
 Annual USD 425 billion turnover (2010)
 5.5 million direct jobs, adding up to 33 millions (2010)
 Some 2.5 billion customers (2010)
 Relevant for everybody
© Dr. Daniel Stanislaus Martel Human Resources and Organization
13
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
Aircraft Operators (2)
 A highly fragile industry with high risk operations
 Pressure on margins and cost at any step
 Highly know how, and experience sensitive
 High political exposure, positive and negative (ecologism)
 Vulnerable to externalities (recession, fuel price…)
 Gigants on argyle feet
14
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
Airports / Ground Facilities
 Interface air transport
 Technical/functional monopoly at served destination
 Next to perfect competition for transfer / transit passengers
 Facilitator / focus of local economic development
 Entry / exit door for national economy
 Essential for the country
15
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
Airframe manufacturers (1)
 Economic actors supplying the hardware
 High value adding industry attracting the best brains
 High cost for R & D and overheads
 High drive for innovation in a prospective perspective
 High concentration owing to competition
 Essential for the country
16
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
 Their product: airframes
 Numerous physical, mathematical, functional constraints
Maximum drive for economic efficiency
Maximum need for Risk Management at any level
 Very little space for product differentiation
17
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
 Fundamentals of airframes
 Product life cycles of 20 to 40 years (second hand market)
 High degree of technological and contractual lock-ins
 Sensitive to « correct » timing of market entry
 Each programme is high risk owing to competitor’s life cycle
 A high risk business!
18
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
 Technology drive behind airframes
 Attempt to « leapfrog » competitor
 Attempt to override locked-in competitors
 Race for early commitments
 High degree of customer lock-in (change of supplier)
 A high stake business
19
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
 New products…
 Anticipate market need and foreseeable competitor’s reactions
 Use currently available technologies
 Always major compromises in technology and functionality
 Focused on as many customers as possible
 … always have a wider economic, technological, social context
20
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
 Launch of new airframes
 Gain of productivity for current and future customers
Maximize difficulties for competitors to catch up
Maximize barriers for market entry for new competitor
 Response to expected tomorrows
21
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
 Strategic partnership with operators
 Complex financial operations
 Standalone airframe or first member of aircraft family
 Stepstone to further aircraft models
 Look into the future every day
22
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
Classroom Incubation 1
 What government policies are adequate for air transport
 Conceptualize such a policy in groups for 10 minutes
 Elaborate a global national air transport policy
 Nominate a group representative
 Share your findings with your colleagues
 Build your own air transport future
23
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
Aerospace as a
Strategic Industry
13th March 2012
Reims - France

AIRBUS
Aerospace as a
Strategic Industry
What is Industry?
 Industry is a value-adding economic activity
 Supply of physical goods
 Contributing to local development
 Strengthening national economy
 Raising standard of living of producers and customers
26
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
Aerospace as a
Strategic Industry
Attitudes of Industrial Actors
 Best possible factor allocation
 Providing responses to felt and anticipated needs
 Drive to outpace competition
Making best possible use of factors of production
 Inventions and expected innovation processes
27
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
Aerospace as a
Strategic Industry
The Product Cycle
Integration into society
28
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012
Market penetration
Invention of
product or
service
Approval by
decision
makers
Convince
pioneers
Advantages
felt by others
Invention
generalizes
in market
Invention
becomes part
of society
Response to
a need felt
Win
promotors
for the
«cause»
Target
customers
sharing the
same need
as the
inventors
Solution
responds to
or exceeds
expectations
Solution
offers real
gain in
productivity
Solution
leads to new
attitudes
Author based on Alter (2002), 15-40

AIRBUS
Aerospace as a
Strategic Industry
The Two Types of Innovation
 Proactive invention and reactive learning by experience
 Voluntary innovation: ambition to optimize
 Involuntary innovation: attempt to correct failure
 In both cases: accepted or rejected by society
 In any case there are multiple changes
29
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
Aerospace as a
Strategic Industry
The State in the Economy
Management of territory under its jurisdiction
 Formal institutions governing population and activities
 Elites try to optimize situation for re-election
 Elites promote their interest within and outside state
 Role of state has not ended with globalization
30
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
Aerospace as a
Strategic Industry
The Two Level Game (Putnam)
National Territory International System
Supreme Authority Legal entity/actor
31
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012
Author based on Putnam (1993), 431-468
GOVERNMENT
National policies, among them
economic policies including
application of international
agreements, compliance with
international regimes…
Objective: Optimize national
territory as a production site
International relations through
diplomacy, international
governmental organizations
(WTO), trade agreements,
regional integration (EU)…
Objective: Maximize trade-offs
for national economy

AIRBUS
Aerospace as a
Strategic Industry
Strategic Industries
 Crucial for state and economy as a whole
 Worldwide demand (pharmaceuticals, energy systems…)
 Unsubstituable, therefore inelastic demand
 Complex and specialized know-how intensive processes
 Necessary for economy (energy) and state (security)
 Strategic suppliers are in a situation of monopoly
32
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
Aerospace as a
Strategic Industry
Sensitivity and Vulnernability (Keohane and Nye)
Other Country National Territory
Other Country
G O V
Economic
Policies
Economic
Policies
Economic
Policies
33
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012
Author based on Keohane and Nye (1989)
G O V
E C O
G O V
E C O E C O

AIRBUS
Aerospace as a
Strategic Industry
Strategic Trade Policies (Krugman)
 Prevent vulnerabilities – lower sensitivities
 Policies target already strong strategic industries
 Mixture of national economic and technology policies
 Mixture of international initiatives in favour of national industries
 Related policies (higher education, research, immigration)
 Not to be confused with classical protectionism
34
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
Aerospace as a
Strategic Industry
The Technology Leap (Mokyr)
35
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012
Author based on Krugman (Mokyr (1993), 431-468

AIRBUS
Aerospace as a
Strategic Industry
The Challenge: Path Dependence (Krugman)
 Heritage, present and future of a production site
 Site configuration result of all past decision’s outcomes
 Each decision cost-benefit based on site configuration at its time
 Strengths depend on commitments by decision makers
 The stronger Path Dependence, the higher lock-in
 Chance or risk
36
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
Aerospace as a
Strategic Industry
The Chance: The Technology Leap (Mokyr)
 Revolutionary invention leading to fundamental change
 Innovation creates a disruption (plastics, mobile phone…)
 Opportunity to establish new Micro- / Macro-Path Dependences
 Strategic Trade Policies seize opportunities (Silicon Valley)
 High Risk versus High Reward (Question Mark in BCG Portfolio)
 Breaking the lock-in
37
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
Aerospace as a
Strategic Industry
STP and P.D. in Practice: Site Optimization
 Past, present and future focus on Strategic Industries
 Close cooperation between all involved actors
 National policies focused on R & D, S & T, higher
education…
 International policies targeted at maximized trade offs
 Objective: strenghten Strategic Industries
38
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
Aerospace as a
Strategic Industry
Site Optimization (Keohane and Nye)
Other Country National Territory
Other Country
G O V
Economic
Policies
E C O
G O V
Economic
Policies
Author based on Keohane and Nye (1989), Krugman (1996), Krugman (1994)
Economic
Policies
39
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012
G O V
E C O E C O

AIRBUS
Aerospace as a
Strategic Industry
The International Product Life Cycle (Vernon)
40
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012
Author based on www.provenmodels.com
Time
Benefits
Exports / Influence
Losses /Invest
Imports / R & D
New Prod Mature Product Standardized Product
Competing
similar country
Inventor’s country
Technologically leading country
Emerging
country
Technological
emancipation
Rising cost of
production

AIRBUS
 What do you think about Site Optimization
 Discuss one sector per group for 10 minutes
 Elaborate a coherent Site Optimization policy or decide against
 Be your own site optimizer
41
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
13th March 2012
Reims - France

Stages of Airbus History
 A long, international history from the beginning
 1920 – 1965: Setting the stage
 1965 – 1970: The National Champions
 1970 – 1986: The dedicated entrepreneurs
 1986 – 1992: The audacious innovators
 1992 – 2001: The visionary strategists
 2001 – 2006: The scared money makers
 2004 – 2012: The new hard workers
 What does this mean?
44
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

1920 – 1965: Setting the Stage (1)
 Europe: Site Optimizations for Strategic Industries
 Europe until 1939: Airframers are national programmes
 After 1945: Competition between France and United Kingdom continued
 1949: United Kingdom delivers first jet aircraft Comet 1 which fails owing
to overstretched technology leaps
 1955: France launches Caravelle jet which fails on the market
 Technology is not everything
45
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 United States: Free enterprise
 United States until 1939: Airframers are private corporations
 After 1945: Eased market entry through mass production and Marshall
Plan
 1958: Monopolies through large quadrijets Boeing 707 and Douglas DC-8
 1964: First of a series of smaller jets Boeing 727 to swamp the world
market
 Market strategy is everything
46
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 World air transport: towards unlimited growth
 1965: Boeing announces quantum leap with Boeing 747 Jumbo Jet widebody
 1966 - 1967: Lockheed and McDonnell-Douglas announce smaller
widebodies Tristar and DC-10
 Common characteristics (two aisles, containerized cargo) leading to
technological disruption (technology leap)
 Revolution in air transport announced for 1970 - 1972
 Market strategy is everything
47
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 Europe: Cooperation to protect strategic industry of aerospace
 1959: France / West Germany: State treaty for the Transall transporter
 1962: Industrial cooperation Netherlands, U.K., West Germany for the
Fokker F-28
 1965: Industrial and commercial cooperation West Germany, U.K.,
Netherlands for the VFW-614
 All programmes remain marginal in the world market
 New idea: enable economies of scale
48
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 The political breakthrough: the Concorde
 1962: State treaty between France and the U.K. for supersonic aircraft
 French motivations: Additional resources for national leadership programme
 U.K. motivations: Maintain strategic industry, obtaining adhesion to EEC
despite Charles de Gaulle’s veto
 National motivations around common denominator
 1969: Maiden flight, 1975 commercial service, 2006 withdrawn from use
 Concorde: masterpiece of technology, commercial disaster
49
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

1920 – 1965: Setting the Stage
 Analysis
 Lacking economies of scale put European airframers at
disadvantage despite technological superiority
 Transnational programmes as new way to sustain national
Strategic Trade Policies
 U.S. dominate world market through mass production
 The American Challenge / Le défi américain
50
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

1965 – 1970: The National Champions (1)
 The wake up call
 1965: Colloquium of London on future of airframing in Europe
 Window of opportunity following new category of widebody aircraft
 Only chance: transnational cooperation for economies of scale
 20th July 1967: Governmental treaty between France, Western
Germany and the U.K. on the Airbus A300
 Defend national aerospace through transnational cooperation
51
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 National Strategic Trade Policies
 France: new large-scale national high tech project
 United Kingdom: preserve remaining Strategic Industries
 West Germany: Opportunity to show European commitment
and to relaunch aerospace industry
 Common denominators – different orientations
52
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 Common denominator remains minimal
 March 1969: U.K. withdraws from state treaty while remaining a subcontractor
 29th May 1969: State treaty between France and West Germany launching the
multinational Airbus programme
 18th December 1970: Groupement d’intérêt économique (GIE) Airbus established for
programme coordination
 Partners of GIE Airbus: French Aérospatiale 46,7 %, Deutsche Airbus 46,7 %, West
Germany/Netherlands VFW-Fokker 4,2 %, joined by Spanish CASA 4.2 %
 European Investment Bank grants launch aids ; financing and manufacturing remains
the full responsibility of the partners
 Increased economies of scale
53
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 Maximized opportunities
 Aircraft A300 widebody complementary to U.S. competitors
 Aircraft compatible with other widebodies being marketed, thus joining
a new category of aircraft
 Proven technologies in new combinations
 National facilities specialized in one component, integration in Toulouse
 Airbus enables to join the U.S. competitors
54
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
Aerospace as a
Strategic Industry
The Transnational Airbus System
55
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012
Source: Kracht (1994), p.56

1965 - 1970: The National Champions
 Analysis
 Focus on coming technology leap as the last chance for national
aerospace industries
 Complementary product for same market
 Economies of scale through specialization of facilities
 Transition of the U.S. competitors exploited
56
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

1970 - 1986: The Dedicated Entrepreneurs (1)
 Modest beginnings
 9th November 1971: First firm order by Air France for 6
 28th October 1972: Maiden flight of the A300, 33 days before
contractual date
 Performance and cost of operation exceeded expectations
 Sales very difficult owing to lack of trust and experience
 Supported by pioneers and early adopters
57
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 Chances, threats and renewed chances
 Main chance: Complementary to U.S. widebodies
 1974 – 1975: Recession, not one sale
 Tensions between France and West Germany regarding action
 After 1975: Argument of low fuel consumption decisive
 Stakeholders believe in project
58
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 Airbus becomes a political issue
 1975: EEC Commissioner Altiero Spinelli suggests European
aerospace policy
 1976: Professionals within GIE structure launch prospective studies
for complementary Airbus aircraft
 1977: France prefers narrowbody for 150 pax, Germany a shorter
widebody for 220
 Airbus becomes a landmark
59
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 Airbus grows mature
 1978: Launch of smaller A310 decided by partners
 1978: Order of 23 A300 by U.S. operator enables international breakthrough
 Immediate protective action (import tax) by the U.S. government
 Mandate by EEC Council of foreign ministers to EEC Commissioner for
Industrial Affairs Etienne Davignon to obtain cancellation of tax, failure
 1979: international Aircraft Agreement within GATT framework
 Airbus becomes a global issue
60
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 Airbus grows into a risk for U.S. competitors
 1978: Boeing launches the B767 competitor to the A310
 A310 maximises technology leaps (IT, CRT screens, manufacturing…)
 September 1981: maiden flight of B767, 3rd April 1982 of A310
 Both aircraft superior in different areas and representing two
different mission profiles
 Airbus changes competitor’s behaviour
61
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 New Airbus success despite U.S. Strategic Trade Policy favouring Boeing
 1983: longer-range A310-300 launched, 9th June 1983: Updated A300, A300-
600 maiden flight
 2nd May 1984: Launch of A320 narrowbody for 150 passengers
 Technology leaps and disruptions maximized
 1985: New U.S. safety regulation allows transatlantic twin operations (ETOPS)
 Boeing 767 with longer range favoured (financial instead of safety aspects)
 Airbus takes the technology leadership
62
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 In the meantime in the U.S. … Neoliberalism emerges
 New economic paradigm emerges (Reagonomics, Thatcherism)
 Focus on financial and no longer technological performance
 Expenditure cutting at any price, including long-term R & D
 Boeing adopts this paradigm under new management in 1985
 All prospective programmes ended with exception of B777 widebody
 Airbus takes the technology leadership
63
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

1970 - 1986: The Dedicated Entrepreneurs
 Analysis
 Difficulties to penetrate market since few early adopters
 Programme portfolio aligned on future market needs
 Despite opposed interests, governments find consensus
 Focus on technological superiority
64
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

1986 - 1992: The Audacious Innovators (1)
 New attacks and successes
 1986: U.S. claim Airbus subsidies violate 1979 Aircraft Agreement
 1987: EEC Commissioner for Trade, Willy de Clerq, defends the Airbus
programme
 Transatlantic tensions, EEC claiming U.S. subsidies through military
programmes
 26th February 1988: Joint A320 certification by Dutch, French, West German
and U.K. national certification bodies, world premiere
 Attacks through technology and replies through politics
65
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 Steps to future successes
 5th July 1987: Launch of A330 (2 engines) and A340 (four)
 Maximized micro-Path Dependence (both aircraft 94 % compatible)
 Maximized technology leaps for both
 Airbus « Family Concept » through commonality (Cross Crew Qualification)
 Both aircraft launched through reimbursable aids from member states
 Long-term attack on U.S. competition
66
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 Airbus grows European
 March 1988: European Parliament discusses Airbus
 November 1989: launch of longer A321 narrowbody without subsidies
 New production facility in Hamburg to complete Toulouse
 7th October 1991: Roll-out of A340 quadrijet with European anthem
 7th November 1992: Roll-out of A330 twinjet
 Long-term attack on U.S. competition
67
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 The battle of the reports
 September 1990: Gellman report compiled for U.S. Department of Commerce
 Over 19 years, Airbus has received subsidies for USD 19 billion
 No Airbus programme is economically viable
 November 1991: Arnold & Porter report compiled for Airbus Industrie
 Disproves Gellman report, U.S. manufacturers not commercial enterprises
 From 1976-1990 (14 years) USD 15.24 billion through military and NASA research
 It seems a matter of interpretation
68
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 The 1992 EEC – U.S. Airbus Accord (1)
 Agreement negotiated between Brussels and Washington
 Mutual exchange of financial statements to competent authority of other
signatory entity (GIE Airbus member states for Boeing, U.S. government
for Airbus)
 Clause of exception: Saving a manufacturer from bankruptcy allowed
 Clause of limitation: Financial support to new programmes not allowed
 Again, a matter of interpretation and cheating
69
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 The 1992 EEC – U.S. Airbus Accord (2)
 Both sides make concessions on subsidies
 Europe – Airbus: Limitation of public launch aids to 33 % of global budget
of programme; official current interest rate on first 25 % of global amount;
interest rate raised by 1 % on remaining 75 %, integral reimbursement by
Airbus in 17 years maximum
 U.S. – Boeing / McDonnell-Douglas: Limitation of indirect subsidies such as
military and scientific programmes (NASA) to 4 % of global turnover of
targeted manufacturer
 Again, a matter of cheating and interpretation
70
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

1986 - 1992: The Audacious Innovators
 Analysis
 Pro-active attitude sets foundations for the future through
systematic extension of portfolio
 Competition gets nervous and obtains governmental
support
 All involved parties have no interest to escalate the conflict
71
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

1992 - 2001: The Visionary Strategists (1)
 New Airbus successes despite threat
 March 1993: Maiden flight of A321 narrowbody
 May 1993: Launch of smaller version of A320 for 130 passengers named A319
 Assembled in Hamburg-Finkenwerder
 June 1994: Boeing 777 Triple Seven twinjet maiden flight
 U.S. ETOPS regulation extended to transpacific routes, leading to loss of
comparative advantage of A340 qudrijet
 U.S. Strategic Trade Policies in favour of own manufacturer
72
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 Airbus replies to threats
 November 1995: launch of smaller A330-200 derivative
 August 1996: Maiden flight, performance exceeds expectations
 Boeing replies with inferior B767-400 derivative
 Airbus outwits Boeing locked-in on the B777
 Both A330 models become the reference in their category
73
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 1996: Beginning of global duopoly
 15th December 1996: Boeing purchases McDonnell-Douglas
 30th June 1997: European Commission accepts merger under
conditions (civil activities of MDC kept independent for 10 years;
annual report of civil activities to European Commission (97/816/EC)
 1997: During French-German summit, decision to transform Airbus
into full corporation
 Boeing and Airbus switch to neoliberalism and privatization
74
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 Airbus reacts to intensified competition
 December 1997: Boeing 777 Triple Seven countered by A340-600, larger
derivative, and A340-500, quadrijet with longest range ever (18.000 km)
 1999: Airbus Military subsidiary for military transporter A400M launched
 NATO members Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Turkey and U.K.
order 180 for delivery after 2009; South Africa and Malaysia another 12
 April 1999: Launch of A318 for 100 passengers without launch aids
 Airbus consolidated technology leadership
75
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 The road to Airbus, Inc.
 1999: Widespread discussion about Airbus as a private company
 June 1999: French-German government preliminary agreement to
establish European Defence and Space Company (EADS)
 U.K. partner British Aerospace rejects integration
 14th October 1999: Aérospatiale-Matra and Deutsche Aerospace (DASA),
the Airbus partners of the time, merge into EADS
 EADS remains a political issue
76
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 European Defence and Space Company (EADS)
 Negotiated by parent companies of Airbus partners Largadère (Aérospatiale-
Matra since 1998) and DaimlerChrysler (Deutsche Aerospace/DASA)
 Largadère and DaimlerChrysler hold each 30 % of EADS (total 60 %)
 Small corporate headquarters in the Netherlands for fiscal reasons
 Two equivalent headquarters in Paris (strategic management) and Munich
(operational management)
 EADS becomes number two aerospace company after Boeing worldwide
77
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 Airbus Integrated Company
 Established 23rd June 2000 as a subsidiary of EADS
 80 % held by EADS; 20 % by British Aerospace (BAE)
 EADS obliged to buy back BAE share at any time after 2003 (put
option)
 Production facilities, procedures and processes unchanged
 Airbus followed the wave of privatizations
78
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 Renewed vigor of Airbus
 Summer 2000: The very large A380 attracts 95 initial orders
 Airbus governments respect the Airbus Accord of 1992 and grand launch aids of
USD 2.5 billion out of estimated USD 10.7 billion
 U.S. government announces a World Trade Organization (WTO) complaint
 April 2001: A340-600 maiden flight, February 2001: A340-500 maiden flight
 January 2002: A318 maiden flight
 Airbus followed the wave of privatizations
79
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

1992 - 2001: The Visionary Strategists
 Analysis
 Victory of Airbus over one competitor (McDonnell-Douglas)
thanks to aircraft family concept
 Boeing remains successful despite lower commitment for its
future owing to lower prices and existing customer base
 EEC substitutes itself for the individual member states in Strategic
Trade Policy formulation and implementation
80
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

2001 - 2006: The Scared Money Cumulators (1)
 The shock of the decade: Nine Eleven
 Air transport hurt everywhere (recession and security procedures)
 Boeing lays off 30.000 workers
 Airbus reacts in a shortsighted way… und cuts prospective R & D
expenditure
 A380 complexity exceeds expectations by far
 New Airbus attitude: short term focus
81
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 The situation of Boeing
 Boeing 737 narrowbody outdated but cheaper than A320 series
 Boeing 767 outperformed by A330-300 and A330-200
 Boeing 747 Jumbo Jet challenged by A380
 B777 Triple Seven with two engines outperforms A340 with four
following U.S. Strategic Trade Policies in its favour (ETOPS)
 Airbus remained confident in its Path Dependence
82
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 Boeing returns
 New management ends short-term financial priorities and seizes « last
chance for successful turnaround »
 Boeing analyses potential for superiority over A330 and A340
 Disruptive new aircraft B787 Dreamliner
 Boeing maximizes technology leaps and disruptions (composites, comfort…)
 Boeing copies decentralized Airbus system but outsources core competences
 Airbus downplays the risk
83
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 Airbus imitates Boeing
 2002: Airbus sets up engineering centre in Wichita/USA
 2003: Airbus sets up engineering joint venture in Russia
 2003: Airbus officially not worried about new bestselling competitor
 September 2004: Airbus announces an optimized A330-300 as a reply
 Airbus widely criticised for loss of strategic vision
 Airbus management replies that customers are satisfied with A330 series
 Airbus gets inert
84
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 2005: the tide turns
 15th February: B777-200LR roll-out, range similar to A340-500 but lower cost of
operation… enabled by further U.S. ETOPS regulation for twinjets
 18th February: Reveal of A380 and announcement of three months delay
 April: A380 and A350 launch aids incompatible with WTO for U.S.
 27th April: A380 maiden flight with worldwide maximum coverage
 May: new A380 delays announced
 Airbus weakened – Boeing boosted
85
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 Airbus in difficulties
 6th October 2005: formal launch of A350 with 140 orders against 174 for the B787
 November 2005: Boeing launches new B747-8 update which wins substantial orders
 December 2005: Airbus sets up engineering facility in China
 29th March 2006: International Society of Transport Aircraft Trading bashes the A350
 April 2006: BAE sells its stake in Airbus – EADS is obliged to divert funds for it
 July 2006: Scandal with alleged insider deals braks Airbus leadership
 Airbus weakened – Boeing boosted
86
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

2001 - 2006: The Scared Money Cumulators
 Analysis
 Airbus copied Boeing’s short-term focus – and pays the price
in full
 Boeing wins back a long-term operational and strategic
vision
 Revolutionary A380 affected by management problems
87
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

2006 - 2012: The New Hard Workers (1)
 Turnaround in sight?
 17th July 2006: New A350XWB design presented at Farnborough
Airshow
 Wider fuselage than B787 and earlier Airbus widebodies
 First reactions not too enthusiastic
 Widespread scepticism whether Airbus is able to launch programme
 Can Airbus recover?
88
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 Turnaround in sight?
 4th September 2006: A380 test passengers enthusiastic
 11th September 2006: Russian stake of 5.02 % in EADS
 3rd October 2006: another 10 months delay for the A380 announced
 10th October 2006: Christian Streiff, CEO of Airbus Integrated Company
resigns
 7th November 2006: Fedex order for ten A380 freighters cancelled
 Can Airbus rise up again?
89
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 New worries or new opportunities
 10th December 2006: launch of yet reworked A350XWB (materials…)
 Market entry pushted back to 2013, 5 years behind B787 Dreamliner
 Budget of at least USD 15 billion, making subsidies unavoidable
 Main design freeze pushed back to 2008 to learn from the B787
 12th December 2006: A380 certified by EU and U.S. agencies
 The question remains open
90
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 New worries or new opportunities
 January 2007: Boeing outsold Airbus for the first time in 5 years with 1044 against 790 net
orders
 10th January 2007: U.S. open a WTO case on subsidies to Airbus
 9th February 2007: the EU files a WTO claim on indirect subsidies to Boeing
 May 2007: the new joint Airbus/AVIC A320 plant in Tianjin/China is opened
 Summer 2007: Airbus sets up engineering facility in Mobile/Alabama for the A350XWB
 15th October 2007: first A380 delivered to Singapore Airlines
 The question remains open
91
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 Will it never end?
 28th February 2007: EADS Power 8 restructuration programme
launched
 4300 jobs cut in France, 3700 in Germany, 1600 in U.K., 400 in Spain
 Summer 2007: Airbus is hit by the weak US Dollar
 A350XWB to be assembled in Toulouse
 Still, the question remains open
92
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 Towards a new beginning?
 2009: Research on « Sharklet » wing extension for the narrowbodies launched
 2010: Major narrowbody update rumoured
 April 2010: A330-200 Freighter certified
 Summer 2010: Airbus launches the Terminal Aerosave initiative for dismantling
aircraft at the end of their life cycle
 December 2010: Airbus A320 New Engine Option (NEO) combining sharklets, new
engines and other optimizations launched for 2015
 Still, the question remains open
93
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 Diversification into military activities
 2009: Roll out of the A400M
 2009: Multi Role Transport & Tanker (MRTT) becomes new standard
in aerorefueling
 2009: EADS / Martin/Marietta wins Pentagon contract over 179
tankers
 After Boeing claim, final contract awarded to Boeing in 2010
 Aerospace remains a political issue
94
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 In the meantime…
 Boeing runs into difficulties with the B787 « Delayedliner »
 Lack of know how for complex project after decade-long cuts
 Delay over delay... budget overruns of several billions
 Airbus A350XWB runs into difficulties as well and gets delayed
 Customers still criticise Airbus for not having « pushed the envelope » far enough
 Meanwhile… composites are targeted for their long-term environmental damage
 Are composites the quantum leap too much?
95
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 Outcomes
 January 2011: 10.000th order (an A320 NEO)
 June 2011: 667 gross orders for the A320 NEO at the Aérosalon de Paris
representing USD 60.9 billion
 July 2011: Sharklet devices tested for the first time
 15th July: Lufthansa opens first experimental Airbus A320 biofuels service
 2012: Beoing responds A320 NEO with B737 MAX
 A new stalemate
96
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 Current situation
 A320 NEO: The fastest selling aircraft programme in history
 A330 twinjet: Continues to sell very well – major update for late 2012 rumoured
 A340 quadrijet: End of production cycle earlier than expected
 A380: sells slowly but permanently
 A400M still plagued by problems
 A330 MRTT remains niche product
 New opportunities or old chances
97
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

2006 - 2012: The Hard Workers
 Analysis
 Airbus slowly recovers but remains affected
 Boeing underestimated complexities with B787
 Airbus remains trapped in cost saving… and finds
partially back to long term prospecting
 Focus on technological superiority partially redeployed
98
AIRBUS
The Airbus
Case
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
 What can corporations learn from Airbus
 Discuss one type of corporation in groups for 10 minutes
 Be your own site optimizer
99
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

100
Airbus?
You said Airbus?

AIRBUS
A Changing Framework:
European Integration
13th March 2012
Reims - France

AIRBUS
Basics of territorial / geographical convergence
 Economies of scale
 Static gains owing to increased factor allocation
 Dynamic gains owing to increased resource availability
 Collateral gains such as leverage in negociations
 Personal gains such as prestige
 … yours to learn from 102
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

The Road to the European Union
 Economic integration first, political convergence second
 1948: Organization for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC) for Marshall Plan
 1949: Council of Europe for scientific and political resource pooling
 1950: Association of European Aircraft Manufacturers established
 1951: European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) to « denationalize » strategic
industries
 1955: European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC)
 Common challenges in several key fields
103
AIRBUS
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

The Road to European Institutions
 The European Communities
 1957: European Economic Communities (EEC)
 1959: European Investment Bank (EIB)
 1960: Eurocontrol for transeuropean air traffic control
 1962: EEC becomes supranational in agriculture
 1965: European Commission establishes the Politique de recherche scientifique et technique
(PREST)
 1966: EEC negociates the GATT Kennedy Round in its own right
 From association to delegation
104
AIRBUS
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

The Road to European Policies
 A new international actor emerges
 1972: EEC and EFTA establish Committee on Scientific and Technological Cooperation
(COST)
 1972: Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) for parallel aerospace and air transport
certification
 1974: EEC obtains UN Observer status
 1974: The EEC contributes to the European Science Foundation (ESF)
 1975: The Directorate General XII Research carries out the « Europe + 30 » research to
to predict the future of Science & Technology in Europe
 From delegation to adoption
105
AIRBUS
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

The Road to European Politics
 A new international authority readies itself
 1978: Common monetary policy
 1979: First direct election of European Parliament
 1980: Council Directive 80/1266 rules Air Accident Investigation
 1984: First Framework Programme for scientific research
 1985: French President Mitterrand launches the Eurêka technology initiative
 From adoption to integration
106
AIRBUS
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

The Road to European Visions
 A new international actor enters the scene
 1985: White Paper on Single European Market by 1992
 1986: Single European Act aligns national foreign policies
 1987: European Airworthiness Authorities standardize air operations
 1990: Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) established
 1990: Schengen Agreement abolishes frontiers
 From integration to takeover
107
AIRBUS
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

The Road to European Programmes
 A new international actor enters the scene
 1992: Maastricht Treaty transfers national political prerogatives to the European Union (EU)
 1993: Single European Market launched
 1996: Beginnings of the Single European Sky initiative
 1996: European Commission suggets to consolidate the European aerospace industry as the
only way to resist U.S. competition (Com(97) 466 final)
 1997: European Association of Aerospace Industries (AECMA) launches the European
Integrated Aeronautics Programme (EIAP)
 2001: Euro introduced as the European currency
 From takeover to association
108
AIRBUS
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

The Road to European Leadership
 A new supranational entity gets active
 2001: Experts claim in « Vision 2020 » as an answer to the European Commissioner for
Research that Europe can take the lead in aerospace
 2001: Aerospace actors establish the Advisory Council for Aeronautics Research in
Europe (ACARE)
 2002: European Air Safety Agency (EASA) established (EC Regulation 1592/2002)
 2003: Commission Regulation on aircraft certification (CR 1702/2002
 2004: European Commission launches Single European Sky ATM (SESAR) to merge
aerospace technology and air traffic management and procedures
 From assimilation to responsibility
109
AIRBUS
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
Towards a European Crisis?
 A new supranational entity gets active
 2004: European Constitution rejected by referendum
 2005: European Union Emissions Trade Scheme (EU ETS) targets air transport
 2007: Europe hit by financial crisis
 2009: Recession and beginnings of the Euro crisis
 2011: European Financial Stabilization Mechanism and European Financial Stability
Facility
 2012: European Union Emissions Trade Scheme (EU ETS) launched
 From responsibilities to burden 110
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
 What do you think about the European integration
 Compare three influences in groups for 10 minutes
 Elaborate a coherent profile for one sector
 Be your own integrator
111
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

112
Airbus?
You said Airbus?

AIRBUS
The World Around Everything:
Globalization and Neoliberalism
13th March 2012
Reims - France

Examples
 Four representative projects
 How Airbus fights competitors
 A business strategy
 How the Airbus A380 came into being
 Example of a complex project management
 The ongoing match
 Airbus A320 Neo versus Boeing 737
 The open next round
 The Boeing B787 versus the Airbus A350 XWB
114
AIRBUS
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

How Airbus Fights Competitors (1)
 An integral strategy…
 Maximize technology leaps as long as adequate
 Right timing in respect to futured air transport demand
 Product differentiation through complementarity
 Long term vision in technology and customer response
 Customer lock-in through Path Dependence
 … based on superiority
115
AIRBUS
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

The Airbus Challenges based on Porter
Potential Entrants
Threat of new
competitors (RU, BR, TJ)
116
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012
Source: Author based on Cortez (2010), p.76
Strategic
Risks
for AIRBUS
Industry Competitors
Rivalry among
existing firms (Boeing)
Buyers
Bargaining power of
customers (airlines)
Substitutes
Threat of substitute
products (ICE…)
Suppliers
Bargaining power of
suppliers (engines)
AIRBUS

Statistics of a Success Story
117
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012
AIRBUS

The Airbus Challenges based on Porter
118
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012
AIRBUS

How the A380 came into being (1)
 Maximized disruptions without « ripping the envelope »…
 Product elaboration with all aspects in mind
 Maximized innovations within existing Path Dependence
 Creating a new product category
 Maximized Marketing Hype
 Customer lock-in through Path Dependence
 … as a way to minimize risks
119
AIRBUS
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

A380 implementation and Risk Centered Approach
120
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012
AIRBUS

A380 implementation and Risk Centered Approach
121
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012
AIRBUS

AIRBUS
How the A380 came into being (2)
 Challenges encountered and overcome
 Exponential complexity of product, manufacturing and
development
 Budget overflows in times of expenditure cutting
 Management problems unrelated to properties of aircraft
 Negative dynamics of management problems
 … yours to learn from exponential complexity 122
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

The Open Next Round: B787 versus A350 XWB (1)
 Challenges overcome and pushed aside?
 Boeing 787 posed challenge
 Airbus hit by recession and during short-term economies
 Minimized response in the A350 based on A330 family
 Customers wanted a strong Airbus to avoid Boeing monopoly
 Airbus half heatedly yielded to customers (situation of monopoly)
 Airbus has to learn again
123
AIRBUS
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
Risk Taking In Innovation
New Product
B787 / A350 XWB
New way of
Distribution
Disruptive Marketing
Source: Author based on Cortez (2010), p.278-291, Murdick, et.al. (1989), p.177-201, and Hampton (2009), p.81-94
124
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012
New technology
Many disruptions
New way of
Manufacturing
Composites
R I S K

The Open Next Round: B787 versus A350 XWB (2)
 Challenges still underestimated
 Airbus A350XWB attempts to leapfrog the B787
 Programme attempts to learn from technology leap
 Airbus still wants to minimize cost
 Customers are deceived and try to obtain more
 Boeing has chance to « shoot down » A350 XWB through B777 upgrade
 Will Airbus learn the lesson?
125
AIRBUS
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

The Successful Match A320 NEO versus B737 MAX (1)
 Airbus dominates the upcoming cycle
 Fastest selling aircraft family in history with 1400 orders in 1.5 years
 Extrapolation of proven existing design
 Technological updates
 No disruption, therefore Micro-Path Dependence fully maintained
 First major product overhaul
 Boeing has difficulties to follow
126
AIRBUS
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
The BCG Product Portfolio applied to Airbus
Question Marks (A380) Stars (Airbus Narrowbodies)
127
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012
Source: Author based on Krogerus et al. (2008), pp.14-15
Relative
Marketshare
Growth in Market
High
High
Low
Low
Dogs (A350 XWB) Cash Cows (A330)

 Airbus dominates the upcoming cycle
 Fastest selling aircraft family in history with 1400 orders in 1.5 years
 Extrapolation of proven existing design
 Technological updates
 No disruption, therefore Micro-Path Dependence fully maintained
 First major product overhaul
128
AIRBUS
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

 Boeing in the meantime
 B737 far older than A320
 B737 far more difficult to upgrade – but no monopoly wanted
 Other constraints (landing gear lower than A320), limiting engine
options
 Pressure on cost of R & D
 May run into difficulties
129
AIRBUS
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
 What do you think about these programmes
 Adopt one of them for your industry
 Be your own programme manager
130
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

131
Airbus?
You said Airbus?

AIRBUS
Looks into the
Future as a Conclusion
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
Looks into the
Future for a Conclusion
Open Questions (1)
 Some examples
 New competitors
 Technology leaps and disruptions
 Alternative fuels
 Future raw materials demand and supply
 Yours to think about them
133
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
Looks into the
Open Questions (2)
 New Competitors
 Russia and China make efforts in Strategic Trade Policies
 Massive investments
 Winning trust by customers
 Airbus and Boeing well-established (common interest)
 Fundamental disruptions impossible
134
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

The Vernon International Product Life Cyce
135
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012
Source: Author based on Graf (2002), p.23
AIRBUS
Looks into the

AIRBUS
Looks into the
Open Questions (2)
 Technology leaps and disruptions
 Widebodies: ongoing potential for optimizations
 Narrowbodies: disruptive potential limited owing to operational
constraints
 New materials and technologies of limited impact on short haul aircraft
 Aircraft remain compromises following systemic lock-ins (infrastructure!)
 From reality to dream
136
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
Looks into the
Open Questions (3)
 Alternative fuels
 Global air transport fuel demand counts for 3.4 % of world oil
consumption
 Efficiency gains of jet engines some 40 % over the last 50 years
 Leverage gains (ATC, flight management, ground procedures…) largely
untapped (potential at least another 40 % savings)
 On-board storage, refueling and safety issues
137
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
Looks into the
Open Questions (4)
 Alternative fuels
 Hydrogen too disruptive
 Biofuels more promising but energy yield lower
 Biofuels not more ecological if overall picture in mind
 Solar energy and electricity out of the question
 Integral research to be continued
 Beware of illusions
138
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

AIRBUS
Looks into the
Open Questions (6)
 Future raw materials demand and supply
 Ecological approaches do not reduce demand for critical raw
materials
 Quantities lowered owing to better engineering
 Depending on technologies adopted (LED diodes, displays,
materials…)
 Air transport remains marginal in overall resource use
139
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

The Look into the Future
Prognoses
Pro-jections
Short Distance into the Future Long
140
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012
Low High
Scenarios Expectations
Wishes
Hope
Reliability
AIRBUS
Looks into the

The Future As It Will Most Probably Be
Prognoses
Pro-jections
Short Distance into the Future Long
141
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012
Low High
Scenarios Expectations
Wishes
Hope
Wild-card
Wild-card
Wild-card
Wild-card
Wild-card
Black
Swan
Black
Swan
Reliability
AIRBUS
Looks into the

AIRBUS
 What do you think about the Airbus case
 Discuss in groups for 10 minutes
 Elaborate an overall conclusions
 The floor is yours
142
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com
13th February 2012

143
Airbus?
You said Airbus?

144
Qs and attempts of As
 « ? »
 « !! »
13th February 2012
dmartel@bluewin.ch
www.danstanmart.com

The Airbus Program - National Champions, European Project, Global Player

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

En vedette

En vedette (18)

Similaire à The Airbus Program - National Champions, European Project, Global Player

Similaire à The Airbus Program - National Champions, European Project, Global Player (20)

Plus de Daniel Stanislaus Martel

Plus de Daniel Stanislaus Martel (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

The Airbus Program - National Champions, European Project, Global Player