How is prioritizing performance over quality working out for Boeing? Just because a business is for-profit doesn't mean it can ignore quality. In fact if you ignore it for long enough you might find you don't have a business anymore.
Again, the quality you are speaking of is NOT the "absolute quality", but the quality perceived by the customers (plus eventual regulations).
McDonald's is pretty successful but the absolute quality of their product is low when compared with anything else. It's because the customers' perceived quality is a mix of "price/fast service/etc." and NOT quality.
What you call quality can or can not be part of the business performance. If it is part of, then a company optimizes for it (e.g. any aerospace company like Boeing operated in Western countries). Otherwise, they optimize for something else.
PADI has so far been more similar to fast food, fast fashion, or low-cost drone manufacturers than to Boeing. It has been their business model, and there have never been regulations to force it to increase the "training quality"
Cultural changes do not require a lot of time in relative terms, they require a lot of consistent energy. Certainly since
@boulderjohn wrote the article in 2010 is more than enough time for cultural change. If enough people would have put the consistent energy into it.
I completely disagree. It depends on many many factors. In the case of PADI, they have to deal with a bunch of old instructors who do not want to change. So either they offboard them (and they can't in my view, and I know from internal sources also they think they can't), or they need to wait for them to retire. PADI is opting for the second one. I agree with them. This is a choice, and I can't prove you wrong, nor you can prove me wrong. Only trying both options will prove which one is better, and as I mentioned before this is just not going to happen
![Smile :) :)]()