Use Of The Rivlin 780 Primer example essay topic

Sky Aviation is faced with a dilemma that many organizations often face-safety versus profitability. In this case, the profit seems to be jeopardized if Sky Aviation chooses to operate by the Civil Aeronautics Board's (CABs) Safety Bulletin. Another, longer-term issue, which is also a product of the CABs bulletin, is to decide which Rivlin high-chromium product to use while the company goes forward. Should Sky Aviation live up to their mission statement and enact the safety measures by using Rivlin 780, or should Sky Aviation continue with the profitable, cost-efficient solution of continuing to use Rivlin 680? Supported by the facts, critical analysis, and alternative solutions discussed below, we feel that Sky Aviation should enact the CABs bulletin and continue to produce the highest quality product, no matter what. In any organization, key players possess inherent biases.

These biases may be neither stated nor factual. In this analysis, Sky Aviation's President / CEO must decide whether or not to enact a CAB Safety Bulletin or to protect its profitability. Due to mergers and stockholders, they need to appear financially sound, to uphold a reputation for producing a quality product, and to satisfy clients who purchase their product. What each of the six key players (five from Sky Aviation and one from Squantum Airlines) recommends, in part, reflects their position within the two companies.

Higher officials lean more toward intangible products-reputation and quality; and lower managers lean more toward tangible products-ease-of-use and difficulty in disposal of by-products. In examining the recommendations for using the new high-chromium primer, Rivlin 780, the CAB strongly recommends its use. They cite a 2-3% (no statistical significance cited) increase in corrosion resistance at crucial stress points; however, they do not provide information regarding the availability of comparable primers, nor do they make a statement regarding the implications of failure to use the new, improved primer. Is it to be assumed that Sky Aviation is well-versed in aircraft skin failures? They may log failures with their own aircraft, but they may be unaware that this could be an issue.

Perhaps, their airplanes are purchased for use primarily over terra firma as opposed to oceanic travel where corrosion is more problematic due to salt water. Could the CAB have issued other recommendations that would have the same or a greater effect upon minimizing stress at crucial points such as reminding pilots to practice soft landings? Did the CAB provide data and or references to enable Sky Aviation to make an informed decision? Were there other more cynical reasons for the CABs recommendation? With given information, one cannot determine the validity of the CABs bias. Meanwhile, back to Sky Aviation-only one official (the Vice-President for Production) recommends that Rivlin 780 be used.

His bias is in the assumption that competitors will react positively to the CAB recommendation, and he wants to beat the competition. It appears that he has reacted to a situation without questioning its merits. There is no doubt that the Production Supervisor is not in favor of using Rivlin 780. He explicitly states that he believes that the airplane's appeal will be lessened, that its use will be more costly, and that it is more difficult to apply. His bias may be without foundation because he blindly accepts what others tell him. He did not ask the Vice-President at Squantum Airlines for concrete information regarding customer's acceptance / rejection of airplanes protected with Rivlin 780.

Perhaps the Vice-President of Fleet Acquisitions has misinterpreted his customer's reasons for rejection. Has a customer survey been done? The Production Manager at Sky Aviation implicitly agrees that Rivlin 780 not be used because she concurs with the Production Supervisor. Her bias cannot be determined. There is one key player at Sky Aviation from whom no response is elicited. The Accounts' Manager definitely must keep the customer happy (i. e., Squantum Airlines), but it's also prudent for him to guard the company's reputation.

Of all the players, he may just be in the most precarious position. Squantum Airlines has refused to accept delivery of seven aircraft-a factual loss. Although the Accounts' Manager's recommendation for the use of Rivlin 780 does not appear to be sought, he is the person who must appease the client. The most obvious bias faced by this manager would be in his belief that his company will sustain permanent losses in the sale of aircraft to all clients because of one client's actions. His bias may be well-founded. Perhaps, he should survey other clients regarding this issue.

Based upon the information provided, there are a few possible alternatives that should be examined. First, Sky Aviation could decide to follow the recommendation of Harry Ro terman not to use Rivlin 780. As a Production Supervisor, he has first-hand technical knowledge of the damage that would be caused by the proposed use of Rivlin 780. He points out that Rivlin 680 is more appealing to customers because it does not leave the stains that Rivlin 780 does, albeit without the added 2-3% increase in safety. Environmental concerns also play a role in making a decision to begin using Rivlin 780. Due to the elevated chromium levels of Rivlin 780, it is classified as hazardous material.

As such, a special tanker truck must dispose of it. Costs for such operations can run as high as $650 per aircraft. In contrast, Rivlin 680 requires no special handling and can be easily disposed of via the sewer. Additional costs with the use of Rivlin 780 are also incurred due to the fact that special training is required for employees before they can properly apply Rivlin 780.

Another alternative would be for Sky Aviation to begin to use Rivlin 780. Volvo made a name for itself by producing the safest cars in the world. Similarly, by increasing the safety of the aircraft that they produce, Sky Aviation may be able to create a more positive reputation as manufacturers of safe aircraft. This reputation could help offset any possibility for profit losses in the long-run due to canceled orders for unaesthetic stains caused by the use of Rivlin 780.

After evaluating the evidence and the alternative solutions, the use of Rivlin 780 is the ultimate solution for keeping the company's reputation positive in the marketplace. As per the mission statement that Sky Aviation continues producing the safest, highest quality, and best performing aircraft on the planet, it is essential for Sky Aviation to meet the criteria of new safety developments in order to compete in the aircraft manufacturing industry. The Rivlin 780 primer provides a 2-3% greater safety margin which increases customer confidence when purchasing the aircraft. To be competitive and to maintain a good reputation, use of the Rivlin 780 primer may return profits in the short-term, but it will definitely be more beneficial in attracting more customers in the long-run. This solution requires cutting costs in non-essential areas and adjusting the costs associated with manufacturing the safest aircraft with the use of Rivlin 780. In the future, Sky Aviation should mandate an evaluation of the costs for manufacturing aircraft by implementing new cutting edge ideas relating to the disposal of Rivlin 780 in order to achieve greater profits and to maintain the standards of the company.