Aircraft Manufacturing Industry: Individual Workplace Environment and Industrial Climate

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Literature Review
Methodology
Comparisons and Contrasts
Discussion and Recommendations
Conclusions
References

Introduction

Aircraft and aerospace manufacturing industry is one of the prominent high-tech production industries in the world. It produces parts and components as well as assembly and maintenance services to create airliners, business, and general aircraft, military products, as well as helicopters and other rotatory wing devices. The global aerospace industry is worth about 840 billion dollars, with over 315 billion dollars, specifically invested in technical oversight and maintenance.

The total number of employees in the US alone exceeds 450,000 individuals in direct jobs and over 2.4 million in affiliated occupations. At the same time, employment had been shrinking since the 1970s, dropping from over a million active workers by more than a half (Aerospace Industry Association, 2016). One of the reasons for such a steep decline lies in the availability of alternatives and the changes in the industrial climate.

Due to high levels of technology implemented in the construction of airplanes, qualified and experienced employees are difficult to come by, meaning that the costs of turnover are steep. The attrition levels in aircraft manufacturing are currently low, standing at 5.2% (AIA, 2016). However, the competition for qualified employees ought to grow significantly in the next years, as over 14% of the entire workforce is approaching retirement, with 3.2% of them permanently leaving the profession every year (AIA, 2016). As such, it is paramount to attract new talent by improving the industrial climate and individual workplace environment, in order to further reduce attrition and increase recruitment rates to fill out various STEM positions. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the key issues that impact the industrial climate and offer recommendations to overcome them.

Literature Review

Summary of Key Factors

There is a multitude of different factors that affect the industrial climate and workplace environment in the aircraft manufacturing industry. The mechanisms of these factors differ from one to another, affecting the desire to study in STEM-related specializations, to seek employment in the industry, and to remain in it for a long period of time. The major issues are as follows (Wang et al., 2017):

Entry barriers. Various requirements towards physical and mental capabilities as well as the education of a prospective candidate can increase or reduce employment rates in a specific industry. These barriers also affect industrial culture in a variety of ways.
Career opportunities. All industries offer a number of ways for an individual to advance their skills and socioeconomic positioning within the company structure. The availability and requirements to fill those requirements directly affect the climate and competitiveness in the industry and in the workplace.
Burnout. All work is associated with stress and difficulties that affect the desire of employees to hold onto a particular industry. Burnout is a negative occurrence influenced by the physical and psychological aspects of industrial climate. It also has an inverse correlation with the desire to stay in the industry – low burnout rates constitute for high retention rates and the other way around.
Physical factors. The workplace environment is affected by physical factors that can determine burnout rates as well as dropout rates based on various physical properties of the station. Some of the factors involved include employee safety, the availability of tools and equipment, and the interactions between employees and the workplace.
Psychological factors. The second half of the workplace environment is affected by various psychological factors ranging from leadership to workplace conflicts, discrimination, and employee-customer services.

The issues associated with each of these factors will be elaborated in the following sections of this literature review.

Entry Barriers

Although the requirements and demands towards skill and education of the employees vary greatly across the supporting industry, the core jobs at aircraft production facilities require a STEM degree in order even to be considered for the entry-level position. These requirements are justified by the increased technical expertise necessary to utilize the equipment and produce high-quality elements of aircraft construction. At the same time, STEM recruitment in all areas, especially avionics, suffers from underperformance. Doerschuk et al. (2016) report that STEM recruitment and retention suffer across every segment of the pipeline.

As a result, both the quantity and quality of STEM students suffer. He highlights some of the major issues associated with modern stem education. The first one is the entry problem – although present across the entirety of stem sector, the harder sciences that include technology, computing, engineering, and avionics, suffer from a chronic lack of students (Doerschuk et al., 2016). Even among those who sign up for the program, the percentage of dropouts is significant, and a portion of students choose to change majors first year into the education.

At the same time, STEM is not used to discover the full extent of the nation’s potential – female and minority recruitment rates remain extremely low. Only 10% of all girls in the US are considering a STEM career (versus 34% in boys), and that number is dwindled even more by attrition (Doerschuk et al., 2016). The situation for minorities is even worse, as it connects to generational poverty and institutionalized prejudice, which affect both the ability and desire to complete the education as well as the chances of getting hired in the aircraft production industry. Success rates of first-generation STEM students, as well as their adaptation and transition into the workforce, also suffers greatly because of it (Doerschuk et al., 2016).

Although the article provides an overall view on STEM issues in high-tech specializations, there is a gap of knowledge in specific relation to the aircraft production industry. Nevertheless, the issue of STEM under graduation affects all areas of high-technological manufacturing, meaning that the chosen sector is affected by it as well.

Career Opportunities

Career opportunities and the structure of the aerospace industry have certain variations from one country to another. In the US, working in a high-end technological sector usually is associated with large salaries, stable packages of benefits, but very little progression in terms of climbing the career ladder. Hilpert (2019) reports that such developments in the sector are largely motivated by a structure with very few layers of decision-making and strategic importance in the companies. Essentially, the majority of employees in the avionics industry are specialists that, while capable of rising through the ranks in their company of choice, remain in their chosen position for the remainder of their careers. The speed of upward mobility is very slow and requires not only specialized education but also years of experience as well as formal and informal connections to others (Hilpert, 2019).

This creates a negative perception of stagnancy in most engineering and tech-related companies. The common saying is that it takes about 5 years to be considered experienced enough as an independent specialist, and ten more years to reach the expert level (Hilpert, 2019).

None of these titles are correlated to promotions and increases in the scope and responsibility. These issues are viewed negatively by the younger generations, such as millennials, who expect results and promotions based on the amount of skill and work put into a particular project rather than the time of service in the company. Another reason for such a perception of avionics companies is the overall decrease in service time in a particular company. Modern employees tend to change workplaces more often than their parents or grandparents did (Hilpert, 2019). As a result, long-term commitments of 5-15 years are seen as undesirable. These factors have the potential of affecting the perception of the workplace environment and industry climate alike.

Physical Factors, Psychological Factors, and Burnout

Burnout stands for a variety of psychological factors and perceptions of the workplace that make a person apathetic and unwilling to perform to the utmost of their physical and mental capabilities. It is described by a lack of drive and ambition, the willingness to do only the bare minimum required, and the increased desire to leave the profession. The condition is often found in places with great physical or emotional strains, such as schools and hospitals.

The turnover percentage in those facilities is naturally high, exceeding the 20% mark. Arnold, Connelly, Walsh, and Ginis (2015) report a strong correlation between burnout and the perception of industrial culture in employees. The higher the burnout – the lower is the view of the workplace climate. Arnold et al. (2015) also report various issues associated with burnout, ranging from economic consequences of individuals dropping out of trade and needing to be replaced to the overall drop in the quality of labor, which is particularly dangerous for aircraft production, where the quality of labor is paramount to ensure the safety of the passengers.

The human factor is directly related to various issues associated with burnout, and the drop of quality in labor. Shanmugam and Robert (2015) report that up to 90% of all errors and mistakes made in aircraft manufacturing and maintenance are associated with the human factor. The article highlights major activities that contribute to industry culture and promote a higher standard of labor. These factors include a corporate culture based on quality, the application of principles of transformational leadership, and the focus on the physical quality of the workplace, materials, and tools used in production. The integrity of such practices is to be instilled by promoting the tenets of Six Sigma and a healthy corporate culture as well as by ensuring different levels of compliance with safety and quality protocols (Shanmugam & Robert, 2015).

Although it was stated that the overall aircraft manufacturing industry turnover rate is relatively low (5.2%), the percentage is uneven throughout different subsets of the sector. Namely, the highest rates of burnout and employee rotation are found in the maintenance sector. Aircraft maintenance and component replacement are one of the most stressful jobs in the industry. It is associated with long and uneven shifts, poor leadership choices, fatigue, and increased levels of burnout (Galea, 2016).

The issues related the horizontal structure of most engineering companies, and aircraft maintenance facilities remain – the room for career growth is severely restricted to the position of a foreman followed by that of a repair facility manager (Galea, 2016). Other positions related to the overall company functioning are filled by individuals typically hired from the outside. As a result, the perception of the industry and its climate remain relatively bleak.

Workplace safety makes an important part of physical effects on the workplace environment. The physical aspects of producing and outfitting airplane details have many issues associated with engineering, construction, and manufacturing (Karanikas, Melis, & Kourousis, 2018).

Some of the many dangers facing an average employee at the workplace include falling objects, hazardous chemicals, and materials, tools, and refuse. These issues are related to accidents, trauma, and the increased feelings of stress among the workers (Karanikas et al., 2018). Due to the standards of quality forced upon the industry by various regulations as well as the overall shortage of workers, workplace safety standards in the production facilities are held relatively high. The overall safety measures in maintenance bays are lower due to overworking, tighter schedules, and a general lower demand for the quality of labor (Karanikas et al., 2018). Nevertheless, it remains higher than in most other manufacturing and maintenance industries.

Corporate culture and leadership make up one of the primary defining factors in the aircraft manufacturing industry (Vertesy, 2017). At the same time, it suffers from the same plethora of problems as do other engineering and technology-based facilities. One of the primary issues is the outdated command and leadership structure. The majority of the employees and leaders in the sector are white men from the Baby Boomer generation (Vertesy, 2017).

As such, they implement the traditional organization style and transactional leadership in their dealings with other employees. It does not resonate well with younger employees, causing additional distress to the perceptions of the workplace in the aircraft manufacturing industry, increasing the desire to leave the profession and promoting conflicts between the workers and their superiors (Vertesy, 2017). The reviewed article suggests that transformational and servant leadership styles are associated with increased satisfaction and reduced burnout rates, facilitating cooperation, and reducing the chances of confrontation between junior and senior employees.

The last issue to address in the scope of industry climate and workplace environment revolves around the treatment of women. The engineering sector is notorious for being one of the most male-dominated areas of expertise (Tejani & Milberg, 2016). The reasons for that stem from various stereotypes about male and female-dominated professions. The degree of sexism and prejudice towards the few women working in the aircraft manufacturing industry is high. Women are seen as out of place and are less likely to be respected by their peers, especially in the positions of power (Tejani & Milberg, 2016). At best, they are seen as token representatives placed to appeal to the progressive tendencies and laws about gender equality. At the worst, it is assumed the woman achieved the position of power through suspicious activities.

Therefore, the perceptions of workplace climate suffer, making women less likely to study and aspire to join the aircraft manufacturing industry as employees or managers. Since engineering professions are perceived as male-dominated and inherently sexist, female employees expect harassment and less pay than their male counterparts, making the option of joining the profession less appealing (Tejani & Milberg, 2016). Coupled with how women are treated in adjacent spheres of interest only reinforces the issue, thus serving as a detriment to attracting new employees to replace the retiring Baby Boomers.

Methodology

The theoretical, methodological, and practical contributions of the selected studies are in line with the framework laid out by Wang et al. (2017) at the beginning of the paper. The studies address each of the potential issues that could affect the industrial climate and the workplace environment in the aircraft manufacturing industry. The examples of the events and effects of these factors could be found in the researches themselves as well as various media related to different manufacturing companies. For example, the situation at the Boeing company illustrates the issues regarding employee shortages – over 40% of the company’s current roster is comprised by men between 50 to 60 years of age (Harl, 2014).

The majority of the companies involved in the industry, such as Embraer, Airbus, and others is predominantly male across all of the positions starting from the bottom and ending at the top, demonstrating sexism and gender-preferential treatment. Lastly, the issue regarding STEM education is based completely on real-world examples. Wang’s framework allowed for researching articles to cover all sides of the multifaceted issue and its relation to industrial climate and workplace environment, touching upon education, recruitment, perspectives for career advancement, burnout, as well as various physical and psychological factors affecting the perception of the workplace.

Comparisons and Contrasts

Each of the articles presented in the paper has a focus on different aspects of the study. Nevertheless, there are several important similarities between the papers to consider. Nearly all of them acknowledge the importance of portraying and presenting employment in the aircraft manufacturing sector in a positive light. A hopeful perception of the industry forms a better image and is more likely to attract more employees, which the sector will be in dire need of once all of the Baby Boomers phases out and reach retirement. Articles regarding burnout, leadership, and various other psychological factors, such as sexism and acceptance of another gender in leadership models, recognize the importance of corporate culture as the founding block of industrial climate and workplace perception of aviation manufacturing.

At the same time, the contrast lies in the different focuses of each individual article. While each presents a particular point of interest as paramount to the working climate, they seem to be downplaying the importance of others. The identified gap in knowledge is demonstrated by the lack of systematic reviews dedicated to the aircraft manufacturing industry, which is something this paper seeks to correct.

Discussion and Recommendations

As illustrated by Wang et al. (2017) and further proved by the articles presented in this literature review, the perception and industry climate in the aviation manufacturing industry leaves the place closed to many potential employees. It is a systematic problem that starts in STEM universities and ends in the workplace. Like other engineering professions, aircraft manufacturing and maintenance are largely conservative towards new corporate climates, leadership styles, and cultural norms. With Baby Boomers being a dominant (if dwindling) demographic in the workforce, the system is largely built on their views and beliefs.

These traits come into conflict with virtues and perceptions of work as seen in the younger generations, who favor creativity, flexibility, and opportunity for using their talent and earning promotions. It makes the manufacturing sector less attractive to them.

The issue of sexism and gender stereotyping affects the aircraft manufacturing sector on a tremendous scale. Women constitute roughly 50% of the world’s population and hold as much in terms of knowledge and employment potential as men. At the same time, the outdated views on women in tech professions and the societal prejudices towards particular paths of an education severely limit the number of women eager and willing to join the industry. At the same time, glass ceilings and wage pay gaps prevent them from thriving and make them more likely to leave the profession. The unhealthy workplace culture based on authoritarian leadership, transactional interactions between members, and few avenues for rapid career growth further exacerbate the issue.

As such, the proposed solutions to the aircraft manufacturing sector are systematic, based on the findings of the academic sources cited in this paper, and revolving around increasing the perceptions of industry climate and workplace culture with the purpose of attracting new employees. The suggestions are as follows:

Increase corporate support to STEM programs, with a specific focus on female and minority students. The percentage of white male students considering STEM is already high (37%), whereas the percentage of women and minorities is significantly smaller. Additional incentives should increase that percentage, thus widening the pool of potential candidates. In addition, it would improve the industrial climate by presenting it as supporting and inclusive to other potential students.
Change the company structure to allow for greater vertical mobility. Millennial employees want to build their careers based on the quality of their skills and labor rather than long-standing company loyalty. Being given career opportunities is what guarantees their dedication, not the other way around. Providing avenues to quickly rise through the ranks would make the choice of a career in aviation manufacturing more attractive.
Promote transformational and servant leadership styles. Transactional and authoritarian leadership styles from the 20th century are not efficient with the new generations of workers. Millennials want to make great contributions to their companies and see the results of their work. Blind obedience and a lack of the view of the greater picture significantly reduces their motivation, increases burnout, and lowers the perceptions of their workplace environment.
Instill a new corporate culture based on cooperation rather than subordination. Forging meaningful relationships between employees is likely to improve collective efforts and provide a strong circle of support and friendship to every individual employee busy in the manufacturing sector. It would improve the perceptions and the psychological climate within the organization.

Conclusions

The aircraft manufacturing sector is an important industry for the US and the world, employing millions of people in main and supporting positions while providing billions of dollars in revenue. At the same time, it is facing an impending employment crisis, as almost half of its current employees are facing retirement. The low recruitment numbers for the industry are explained by the poor industry culture and low perceptions of the workplace. The suggested solutions were based on the findings of academic literature dedicated to the subject. However, the limitations of the study revolve around various gaps of knowledge in the existing information dedicated to the sector. Additional aircraft manufacturing-specific research is required in the future.

References

Aerospace Industry Association (AIA). (2016). The defining workforce challenge in U.S aerospace and defense: STEM education, training, recruitment, and retention. Web.

Arnold, K. A., Connelly, C. E., Walsh, M. M., & Ginis, M. K. A. (2015). Leadership styles, emotion regulation, and burnout. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 20(4), 481-490.

Doerschuk, P., Bahrim, C., Daniel, J., Kruger, J., Mann, J., & Martin, C. (2016). Closing the gaps and filling the STEM Pipeline: A multidisciplinary approach. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(4), 682–695. Web.

Galea, D. (2016). Shift work, fatigue, burnout and maintenance errors: A study into the Maltese aviation maintenance industry (Published doctoral dissertation). The University of Malta, Msida, Malta.

Harl, T. (2014). The perfect storm of aviation workforce issues. Web.

Hilpert, U. (2019). Diversities of innovation. New York, NY: Routledge.

Karanikas, N., Melis, D. J., & Kourousis, K. I. (2018). The balance between safety and productivity and its relationship with human factors and safety awareness and communication in aircraft manufacturing. Safety and Health at Work, 9(3), 257-264.

Shanmugam, A., & Robert, P. T. (2015). Human factors engineering in aircraft maintenance: a review. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 21(4), 478-505. Web.

Tejani, S., & Milberg, W. (2016). Global defeminization? Industrial upgrading and manufacturing employment in developing countries. Feminist Economics, 22(2), 24-54.

Vertesy, D. (2017). Preconditions, windows of opportunity and innovation strategies: Successive leadership changes in the regional jet industry. Research Policy, 46(2), 388-403.

Wang, Z., Liu, H., Yu, H., Wu, Y., Chang, S., & Wang, L. (2017). Associations between occupational stress, burnout and well-being among manufacturing workers: Mediating roles of psychological capital and self-esteem. BMC psychiatry, 17(1), 364-374.

Click Here To Order Now!