Understanding EADS: A Crisis of Identity
To understand the crisis of identity currently exhibited by EADS you need to understand the mindset of their board of directors and that is not always an easy thing to do.
There are no doubt multiple factors which have influenced this decision to re-brand but one factor which has frequently affected Airbus Industrie (as it once was) thinking - is their insatiable rivalry with Boeing.
The A3XX project (late 80's) was (according to some) specifically generated to knock out the "irritating" 747 series which some saw as being responsible for keeping Airbus firmly in "second place". Establishing themselves as the dominant airline manufacturer has been an all-consuming agenda of Airbus since its earliest days.
I mention this because a business which is driven (even in part) by a desire to achieve conquest, particularly over a specific rival, will always possess a slightly skewed sense of purpose in comparison with a company which is focused on the pursuit of achieving technical ingenuity and delivering customer service. Now, somewhere down the line in the current EADS structure the politics and motives of senior executives will peter out and the "regular employees" will share a common goal (one hopes) of developing technical expertise and customer service but this will always, to some extent, be influenced by the executive culture further up the line.
Rumours about this culture have been many over the years and include some pretty petty jealousies on the part of EADS towards Boeing. Following this train of thought, it is not inconceivable that board members find it irksome that EADS does not share the same "brand power" as Boeing. Boeing can be regarded a household name whereas EADS cannot. The question is .. how necessary is it for EADS board members to drop the EADS name from their conversational encounters?
At present when an EADS board member meets some dignitary (say a senior government minister outside Europe) and he is introduced as a board member of EADS, nine times out of ten you can bet that within a few seconds he (or she) validates this with the statement "the parent company of Airbus."
EADS board members want their children to be able to tell their schoolmates that their mother or father works on the board of "Airbus" so that, as with Boeing, they can enjoy a globally recognised brand. Paganini as much as admits it (at some level) in his memo when he refers to their (Airbus') "high profile brand name."
Boeing Helicopters? "We now have Airbus Helicopters" so says EADS!
An important factor influencing the timing of this move is the global economy. There are respected economists who are convinced that the US Dollar will have collapsed (as in completely collapsed) by 2030 and an accompanying belief that before then the US economy is going to face a downturn in international trade such as has never before been seen. Airbus Industrie's dream of surpassing Boeing is no longer a dream and when the A380 was rolled-out that final hurdle of manufacturing the world's largest airliner was overcome. Airbus were now the airline manufacturer beyond compare!
Is this all about Airbus/Boeing rivalry? Obviously not (as stated in the second paragraph) but, I believe it is a factor. To share brand recognition on a par with Boeing throughout the organisation.
Was it necessary? No. As with Boeing, the Airbus brand is already a household name but (crucially) within the industry EADS is similarly well known. Therefore there was and is no commercial benefit for EADS to be a household name in the same way as Airbus but, as has already been suggested by other posters, what we are dealing here are the egos of the EADS board.
In Paganini's memo he writes "Eurocopter management fully supports this new direction." Yes indeed. As if Eurocopter's management had much choice in the matter!!
And, "It reflects our European roots, but does not fit with our modern stature as an international company and rotorcraft industry leader." To me this confirms that its about being the world industry leader and which agenda Eurocopter has also pursued since its formation in 1992.
What EADS has ignored is that human nature is slow to change (most times) and human nature generally seeks to define things by way of cultural identity so that whatever name you give to an organisation, people instinctively want to know something about its origin. You can call yourself the "Global Helicopter Corporation" but people still want to know your roots and will still seek to define you (to some extent) according to your origins.
What we are witnessing is, in my view, some of EADS' "not so admirable" boardroom politics!
In summary, a successful company which is adamant (almost desperate) to cement its place as "the" leading global airframe manufacturer and, in the process, making some rather unnecessary (and initially counterproductive) decisions.