Introduction
This paper is a reflection on a scenario conducted among the three principal project parties including French sales directors and corporate owners, German technical designers, and UAE-based A380 buyers. The paper examines problems faced by the international project and lessons learned from cultural, language, commercial, and other issues.
Cultural Peculiarities
One of the most striking features of the scenario under discussion is a cultural peculiarity. Speaking of culture, every nation tends to implement its ideas and point of view. In this case, Germans could not understand why the French assemblers were unable to use the fifth version of Computer-Aided Design (CAD) (Airbus – A380 2016).
Nevertheless, the use of a particular version was not discussed at the beginning of the project. It should be emphasized that the interoperability was fully ignored. This misunderstanding might cause future delays and increased costs. Lawrence (n.d., p. 6) states that “it is essential to have established a common and integrated toolset and also common methods and processes”. In other words, it is necessary to utilize the same software and tools in designing the international project. However, if such a situation occurred, then a compromise should be achieved by mutual concessions.
Moreover, organizational culture also plays a significant part in the international project. It is important to develop conflict tolerance and risk tolerance so that employees of different groups might communicate effectively. Also, the integration between units matters.
In this scenario, there was no integration as every party wanted to achieve its own goals instead of the paramount project objective (Airbus – A380 2016). The occurred situation illustrates that the parties failed to act in coordination with each other. Consequently, a coordinated manner should be of priority from the very beginning of the international project. Meanwhile, the best scenario might focus on openness and knowledge sharing.
Overcoming Inconsistency
As it was stated before, the use of different software led to technical problems. However, there is another issue faced by the project related to the inconsistency of actions. In particular, French representatives wanted the Germans to take a share of the costs to rectify while the latter did not recognize any role in the delay as the technical drawings were handed over timely. This commercial issue shows that the project lacks concerted decisions. In this connection, it seems appropriate to stop arguing and elaborate on clear priorities based on the key target.
The fact that French sales directors and corporate owners were unwilling to negotiate on money reveals the reluctance to collaborate and listen to others’ ideas. In its turn, it might cause even the deeper frustration of German colleagues. Therefore, there is a need to establish clear objectives through lean thinking. According to Lawrence (n.d., p. 13), “it encourages the project manager or modeller to identify clear project deliverables and work backwards from these by showing the ‘information-pull’ of the network”. It becomes clear from the above observations that all the parties should think in the same direction.
Furthermore, the mentioned issue reflects poor risk analysis as well as a lack of understanding of dependencies (Lawrence n.d.). For example, Germans were sure that quality control was French responsibility. However, quality issues should be controlled at all levels. Language differences might also cause several problems concerning the metric or imperial transformation of data. As a result, the project turned out to be too complex requiring huge customization. To prevent the above situation, it is crucial to choose the same language of operation. For instance, it might be English due to its widespread nature.
UAE-based A380 Buyers’ Support
Considering the scenario, it becomes evident that buyers are quite disappointed and frustrated by the delay. Some of them want immediate compensation while others are ready to refuse from the sales contracts if Airbus is unwilling to rectify. The situation needs to be resolved as soon as possible as the rejection to buy a part of the A380 aircraft would undoubtedly lead to the increased costs and some suspense of the subsequent production. Therefore, there is a need to provide UAE-based buyers with appropriate support and information concerning terms and technical improvements.
Conclusion
All in all, it seems essential to pinpoint that the situation needs an urgent implementation of comprehensive change management. Based on the detailed understanding of tasks, tools, and cultural specifics, the project should be adjusted to the occurred challenges. In its turn, a sophisticated risk analysis would contribute to the prevention of misunderstandings and similar problems in the future. Speaking of stakeholders, it might be a good idea to set up strong buy-in requirements so that they would be more unwilling to leave the project.
In conclusion, it should be emphasized that this scenario reflection revealed several issues faced by Airbus. They comprise such problems as the inconsistency of actions, lack of cultural and intercultural organization, commercial aspects, and others. All of them need to be resolved according to the suggested assumptions. Finally, this role play was of great importance as it demonstrated the possible issues that might occur in the framework of international projects.
References
Airbus – A380 2016.
Lawrence, P n.d., Planning in the Dark: Why Major Engineering Projects Fail to Achieve Key Goals, pp. 1-17.