The 787 is a really bad example for a launch aircraft as the "technology push" and manufacturing tech push lead to large delays and massive costs that still hurt the program. If Boeing learned from them mistakes it can be a success but it is also a huge risk that needs to be addressed. I do not know if Boeing can handle another delayed program. The 787 was delayed, the 777X is delayed, the 737 was on time? but rushed and is now grounded. The 787 was grounded. Boeing needs to get this one right and the more "experiments" are in it the higher the chance that the program will be an overall failure even if the product is actually good. And if it is delayed and too close to the new generation NSA then this could ripple into the actual NSA for Boeing and delay that as well.
I think delays / groundings / tech failures are unfortunately the new norm. In recent times we had PW GTF's bearing failures leading to it being grounded in at least one jurisdiction and a large amount of economic disruption, RR's T1000 corroded blade failures leading to restrictions and inspections that made it very difficult to operate the type and many frames grounded due to lack of spares, GE9x with "durability issues" grounding the 77X for at least half a year, etc. If we want to go after FAA, keep in mind that RR's failings happened on EASA's watch.
The common thread I see is things we once thought we could take foregranted. Bearings should be well understood, as should coatings, and over dependence on a single sensor with a poor history of accuracy also should be well understood.
Whether or not this comes from management pressure or not IMO is debatable. We do see a tremendous shift of compensation has gone to senior managers and executives which seems to make them hungry for even more. We also see "conscientious objectors" in the trenches suffering career damage. Yet I'm not sure this is new to our era. Having to make unpopular decisions has always been part of an engineer's job description. Since we're talking about something that often is more R&D rather than engineering, neither side can be decisive about what is right and what is wrong. I would say that in my three decades of doing engineering that what I see is more heavy handed management actions and less push back by engineers, but that is just one point of view.
Personally I see a lot lower expectation with regard to ethical standards in the business world. As mentioned earlier I keep seeing products whose contents decrease while the packaging stays the same. We could be honest and just charge more for the same contents, but that's not how we roll these days.
The political movement claiming there is over-regulation has caused a swing to point of insufficient regulation. To paraphrase PJ O'Rourke, giving corporations power and money is like giving teenage boys whiskey and car keys, there's only one way it ends up. In the US, corporations are now people, and their campaign contributions have make Congress their play toy. Again, there's only one way this ends up.
It will be interesting to see who ends up getting career damage at Boeing. We already had one VP of the 737 product take a graceful early exit. I can imagine others have been made to walk the plank. I think at some point the CEO will have to go. His face is too closely associated with the MAX crisis. Yet, he will be fine, his retirement package will let him and his children and his grand children never work another day of their life if they should so choose.