Boeing 737 Max Aircraft: Preliminary Investigative Findings [pdf]
Having worked with Boeing on other aerospace programs (not commercial though) and having been on the Gov side, the basic findings ring true.  Boeing&#x27;s culture really is as flawed as the report reads.  The idea that Dennis Muilenburg, however, originated or did more than prior company management to foster this culture, is nonsense.  They remain, even today, operating with this culture.  The real problem that stands in the way of &quot;fundamental structural reform&quot; is that regardless of specific aerospace market, few alternatives to Boeing exist.  And don&#x27;t think the corporate cultures at other traditional US aerospace primes is consistently better.<p>The points about Government acquiescence to Boeing pressure in performing regulation also resonate.  Beware the tendency to make this a single-axis &quot;more vs. less&quot; regulation issue.  The solution isn&#x27;t &quot;more regulation&quot;.  The central concern should about regulatory culture.  Ultimately, responsibility lines must be drawn, standards established, adjudication performed, and unique or specific situations accommodated.  Inevitably, the &quot;less regulation&quot; crowd corrodes the kind of regulatory culture that serves the best interests of the populace in these processes.  Good regulation depends on having highly-competent, wise, empowered, and apolitical persons on the Government side.  While providing regulatory organizations lots of funding doesn&#x27;t ensure that they hire, empower, and maintain such a cadre, starving them of resources and implying the Government can never be competent, so it should reflect the role back to Industry, is pathological and will produce outcomes like the 737 Max.<p>We need to not just empower and provide adequate resources to regulators, but also demand and foster a culture of competence and good judgment^.  Making that happen is a lot harder than arguing about &quot;more or less&quot;, but necessary for proper outcomes.<p>^&quot;good judgment&quot; here explicitly excludes decision-making with regard to political implications