I come from a different industry before moving into this one, but there’s a chaotic and abysmal lack of teamwork between departments in this industry that I’ve seen this far.
Have those two teams work together.
Also, foster a culture of continuous self-improvement. I’ve now seen a bunch of “it’s good enough to ship, go for it” and now whatever work arounds and bandaids are permanent. Don’t be so fast, don’t try to iterate so quickly, and focus on quality over quick ROI.
Imagine if Boeing behaved like a SaaS operator. The first version of 737 would be glued together, and in turbulence the wings would snap off “oh, I guess we should use more glue in the next version - alright guys, iterate!”
Slow down, do a good job, and the product will come.
I agree with your overall point, but I think your example might be a bit off.
Boeing also cut corners on quality, hence the issues with the 737 MAX. It's obviously not a direct comparison, but skimping on certain things to get something to market faster is not a uniquely SaaS technique.
If I remember correctly the problem was the new models were imitating (with software) the old ones to avoid having to be certified again.
When it was time to fly there were slight differences and this caused the pilots to react in the wrong way for the new model's behaviour.
While I understand the reasons you mention, I do not clearly follow the distinction between cutting on costs and cutting on quality. It seems like two sides of the same coin.
This is getting finnicky, but generally I would consider a quality issue to be something to do with the build (ie substandard materials, poor riveting, trash in the dead spaces in the walls - as has been alleged on the 787) as opposed to what happened, (in my view) which was cost cutting - as you point out, they basically tried to do a software emulation of the previous 737.
The issue isn't flight worthiness - the 737 MAX can be a safe plane - but they cut costs by not wanting to do a recertification or retraining. I guess that is a quality and safety issue, but not what i'd normally consider quality?
Since I looked into 737's middle tank bug that was used in assassination attempt (Thai PM) in 2001. I couldn't believe how stupid its design is [1]. Professional design of airplane is quite overrated TBH.
[1]: There is very low heat cap on middle tank to catch fire inside and be exploded and then there is an air compressor right below it. The security practice is to fill it with nitrogen if it's empty.
Have those two teams work together.
Also, foster a culture of continuous self-improvement. I’ve now seen a bunch of “it’s good enough to ship, go for it” and now whatever work arounds and bandaids are permanent. Don’t be so fast, don’t try to iterate so quickly, and focus on quality over quick ROI.
Imagine if Boeing behaved like a SaaS operator. The first version of 737 would be glued together, and in turbulence the wings would snap off “oh, I guess we should use more glue in the next version - alright guys, iterate!”
Slow down, do a good job, and the product will come.