Innovation or Financialization? : The Evoloution of the Systems-Integration Buisness Model at Airbus and Boeing Mustafa Erdem Sakinç To cite this version: Mustafa Erdem Sakinç. Innovation or Financialization? : The Evoloution of the Systems-Integration Buisness Model at Airbus and Boeing. Economics and Finance. Université de Bordeaux, 2016. English. NNT : 2016BORD0093. tel-01384605 HAL Id: tel-01384605 https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-01384605 Submitted on 20 Oct 2016 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. THÈSE PRÉSENTÉE POUR OBTENIR LE GRADE DE DOCTEUR DE L’UNIVERSITÉ DE BORDEAUX ÉCOLE DOCTORALE ENTREPRISE, ÉCONOMIE, SOCIÉTÉ (ED 42) Par Mustafa Erdem SAKINÇ INNOVATION OR FINANCIALIZATION? THE EVOLUTION OF THE SYSTEMS-INTEGRATION BUSINESS MODEL AT AIRBUS AND BOEING Sous la direction de M. Claude DUPUY et M. William LAZONICK Soutenue le 23 juin 2016 Membres du jury : M. DUPUY Claude Professeur, Université de Bordeaux, co-directeur de thèse M. FRIGANT Vincent Maître de Conférences (HDR), Université de Bordeaux M. LAZONICK William Professeur, Université de Massachusetts Lowell, co-directeur de thèse M. MILBERG William Professeur, The New School Mme. REVEST Valérie Maître de Conférences (HDR), Université Lumière-Lyon-II, rapporteur M. TALBOT Damien Professeur, Université d’Auvergne, rapporteur Innovation ou Financiarisation ? L’Évolution du Business Model basé sur l’Intégration de Systèmes chez Airbus et Boeing. Résumé : S’appuyant sur une approche comparative et historique au niveau de la firme, cette thèse étudie les dynamiques de la réussite économique à long terme de la construction d'avions civils aux Etats-Unis et en Europe. Cette analyse est menée à partir de l’étude d’Airbus et de Boeing qui sont les deux plus grandes firmes du secteur aéronautique au niveau mondial. La thèse identifie les conditions sociales qui influencent les capacités concurrentielles des deux firmes et les pratiques qui jouent un rôle sur l’amélioration ou la dégradation des capacités productives de leur secteur à travers un cadre analytique basé sur les modèles productifs / les modèles d’affaires (productive/business models). Les trois éléments majeurs de l’activité productive au niveau de la firme, à savoir la stratégie d’entreprise, la structure organisationnelle et le degré d’engagement financier sont analysés dans ce cadre appliqué à l’intégration de systèmes. Les résultats de cette recherche montrent qu’il existe une forte corrélation entre la sous-traitance massive, la financiarisation des stratégies d’entreprise et les relations conflictuelles de travail. L’évolution des stratégies d’Airbus et de Boeing et leur influence sur l’amélioration ou la dégradation de leurs capacités productives sont fortement liées aux transformations dans le domaine financier et dans l’organisation productive / les relations industrielles qui caractérisent les économies occidentales depuis les trois dernières décennies. Les conséquences des actions menées par les entreprises sur la promotion de l’emploi dans leur(s) pays d’origine sont questionnées et des implications en termes de stratégies d’entreprise et de politiques publiques sont tirées de cette thèse. Mots-clés : innovation, capacités organisationnelles, financiarisation, intégration de systèmes, industrie aéronautique, Airbus, Boeing Innovation or Financialization? The Evolution of the Systems-Integration Business Model Airbus and Boeing Abstract: This dissertation analyzes the dynamics of long-term success in commercial aircraft manufacturing in the US and Europe performed through a historical-comparative methodology employed for firm level analysis. The firm-level case studies are Airbus and Boeing, the two biggest firms in the commercial aircraft manufacturing industry. Through an analytical framework concentrated on business/productive models of corporate activity, the study identifies the social conditions that influence the competitive capabilities of these two companies and their practices in upgrading, or downgrading, the productive capabilities of their respective industries. The three main elements of firm-level productive activity under modern capitalism, namely corporate strategy, organizational structure and financial commitment are analyzed through the lens of the systems- integration business/productive model framework. The results of the research show that there is a strong correlation between extensive outsourcing, financialization of business strategies and conflicting employment relations. Distinct constructive and destructive processes of corporate strategies of Airbus and Boeing are strongly linked to the role of the transformations of finance and work organization/industrial relations in the last three decades in Western economies. The consequences of corporate action on the promotion of secure jobs with positive prospects for their respective economies are questioned and relevant implications are drawn for business and government policy. Keywords: innovation, organizational capabilities, financialization, systems integration, commercial aircraft industry, Airbus, Boeing The University is not to provide any approval or disapproval regarding the opinions this PhD dissertation includes. These opinions must be considered as being solely those of their authors. L’Université n’entend ni approuver, ni désapprouver les opinions particulières émises dans cette thèse. Ces opinions sont considérées comme propres à leur auteur. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS During the slow progress of this dissertation, some people have contributed, guided and supported in it in various ways. First of all, I would like to thank my supervisors Claude Dupuy and William Lazonick, for their guidance throughout the process of planning and writing this thesis. Claude has given me invaluable comments and feedback from the early stages of my project. Bill has not only guided me from the very beginning of the project, but has also taught me how to do political economy proper. They have been very supportive mentors throughout the process of defining my research questions and writing my dissertation. I am grateful for their time and guidance. I would like to extend my gratitude to the committee members Valérie Revest, Damien Talbot, William Milberg and Vincent Frigant. In addition to my committee, I have been quite lucky in the academic and material support I have received throughout my work. In particular, I want to thank Matthieu Montalban for his enthusiasm, detailed comments, and breadth of perspective on my research. My special thanks go to the ex-occupants of the Room F342, Ji-Yong, Caroline, Nicolas, Alexis and several coffee machines we managed to break who were all the time supportive and understanding. Finally, at all stages of my studies, my family have encouraged and supported me. I am grateful for how strongly they believe in me. The last but definitely not least, I want to thank Antonia, who I met while I was somewhere in the middle of my thesis work (or somewhere in the middle of nowhere). Without her emotional support the dissertation writing process would certainly be much more depressing. TABLE OF CONTENTS General Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1 First Part - Theoretical Framework, Model Building and Industrial Dynamics in Commercial Aircraft Manufacturing .......................................................................................................... 21 Chapter One - Theoretical Discussion and Model Building: Innovation, Capabilities and Business/Productive Models ................................................................................................. 23 1.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 23 1.2 Innovation as organization ................................................................................................... 24 1.3 Innovation beyond organization .......................................................................................... 25 1.4 Need for an enriched return to the analysis of the ‘box’ ..................................................... 28 1.5 Origins of capabilities discussion .......................................................................................... 29 1.6 Organizational capabilities ................................................................................................... 30 1.7 Models as theory building efforts ........................................................................................ 35 1.8 Business Models ................................................................................................................... 36 1.9 Productive Models ................................................................................................................ 37 1.10 Main issues of models ........................................................................................................ 39 1.11 Model proposition of this study