Exploring the Miracle: Strategy and Management of the Knowledge Base in the Aeronautics Industry

Abstract

We consider here the governance of learning and the diffusion of technological knowledge in the civil aircraft industry. We describe a systemic process by which specialization in knowledge encourages depth whilst breadth is captured through the integration of contributions by the lead manufacturer, which acts as systems integrator. We explore the boundaries of the knowledge bases related to airframe structure and systems and aircraft instrumentation by using patents as tracers, considering the range of scientific and technological disciplines related to the industry as well as the sources of that knowledge. We conclude that knowledge base supporting the aeronautics industry is complex and multidisciplinary, and that firms acting as system integrators have to hold the broadest knowledge bases to co-ordinate design and production.

Collective Knowledge, Prolific Inventors and the Value of Inventions: An Empirical Study of French, German and British Patents in the Us, 1975–1999

“…Acha et al (2004) use this notion for exploring the role of the lead manufacturer in the aeronautics industry. In the context of technological knowledge generation, the 'knowledge system integrator' (the prolific inventor) aims to coordinate the competence and capabilities of the members' team in order to increase the firms' technological performance Downloaded by [University of Exeter] at 13:34 05 June 2016 and its economic competitiveness.…”

From 'aircraft manufacturer' to 'architect-integrator': Airbus's industrial organisation model

“…Modularisation is not a new phenomenon in the aeronautics industry (Araujo et al, 1999;Amesse et al, 2001;Acha et al, 2007). Recent changes announce a deepening of this type of organisation as well as a strong redistribution of the roles of the firms involved in the aircraft production process.…”

“…The relationship between the architect firm and the network of firms it structures depends of the nature of the interface (Araujo et al, 1999;Nellore, 2001;Acha et al, 2007;Cagli et al, 2012). Araujo et al (1999) distinguish four kinds of interfaces:…”

Managing Uncertainty and Ambiguity in Gates: Decision Making in Aerospace Product Development

“…The complex nature of the products [Acha et al (2007)] and of the industry (i.e., engineering-intensive products that require a breadth of skill and knowledge and that are usually quite costly) [Prencipe (2004)] is such that a single company cannot manage investments and risks, let alone train workers in all the necessary skills. Payback times (i.e., the amount of time before an aircraft program breaks even) can be very long, stretching to as many as 10 years [Buxton et al (2006)], thus companies tend to be hesitant to take on the financial risk that the investment entail.…”

“…This can potentially negatively influence decision making because the company finds itself in a position of satisficing (i.e., satisfying and sufficing at the same time) [Simon (1955; 1979)] when making decisions, thus reducing the decision makers' confidence. Since product development activities in the aerospace industry are growing in complexity and scope [Flanagan et al (2007); Acha et al (2007)], such development activities will always include aspects of ambiguity and uncertainty. However, there is a need to deal more confidently with situations in which not all the knowledge is in place, given that decisions still need to be made in the gates.…”