I think that Turbine D nails many points to the table. I worked in the corporate field (Telecommunications) for 27 years, including for an American Merchant Bank. I have worked in retail, finance, shipping, chemicals, local govt and several others both permanent and contract, UK, Europe and international. I then changed career (still freelance) but have seen identical problems in my current field.
I have seen the cost-saving problem where mgmt get praised for saving money and then - when it breaks - they have to spend MORE money to fix it. My father's world, and the one when I started work in 1977, was that mgmt got promoted for keeping things running smoothly. By the time we were in the mid-1990s, I saw that they got praised for fixing the problems they had created! Also, people didn't get fired so often. Incidentally, we have seen this enthusiastically taken up by both the USA and UK govts. There is always a more junior person to blame. The Peter Principle is still alive and well in UK commerce and govt.
Marketing? I saw this when I was in retail. The 'shop window' got money thrown at it and the back office had to wait for things to break and be proved that they could not be patched up. I recall a conversation with a colleague who ran the telecomms in a very large and prominent UK hospital. Budgets always had money for the (much needed) operating suites and equipment not the back office. One day, he quietly showed the CEO irrefutable proof that people had died because the telecomms system was in such a poor state. He got the new system.
Boeing reached the same point that Kodak did - they stopped listening because they were the best and everyone said they were the best. They had the ear (and wallet) of govt, they thought they were brilliant and the usual stuff when they get feet under the big table. Old companies do this all the time - just ask the citizens of Detroit.
On a lighter note. The marketing nonsense of the 787 was a good laugh. It was obvious that the kids in marketing hated that the 747 had been nicknamed Jumbo outside their control and that the 380 was being called Super Jumbo. So they had to find their own name. Easy, think of a name and then have a 'competition' to find it. All the wavy paint lines were just fashion. Probably 80% of my friends and family have zero idea what machine or manufacturer they are in. BUT they can tell you the price they paid for the ticket!
Turning to an earlier post as to why Boeing financial stock is still riding high: My guess is that Wall Street consider Boeing 'Too Big To Fail'. They are probably betting that Washington DC will bail them out because they build too many toys for the military. Not to mention 'national pride' and all that nonsense.