I don’t think this a technical problem - it’s a matter of changing culture.
Trying to figure out what to do in any given business situation is usually challenging because the devil is in the details. It happens that in this particular case, Boeing should be checking that their supplier installs bolts and drills holes correctly because their supplier has screwed it up so many times. But in a lot of industries, cheaping out on materials is a reasonable thing to do if your customers agree it's a reasonable thing to do and it's not going to kill anyone.
It sounds like Boeing has mastered the art of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muntzing ... at 30,000 feet.
Accounts ask how much things cost and go from there. MBA's figure out how much things need to cost to make their spreadsheet work and tell you that's what you get.
Which is what happened at Boeing. They told the engineers they were going to develop the 787 for half the cost of previous models (we are very very smart). And it took twice as long and cost twice as much. Given that they couldn't afford a clean slate redesign of the 737 even if they wanted to. The result is the 737 Max which will cost them more than a clean redesign would have.
A 7B7 greenfield narrow body plane would probably have been faster to design and a better plane in lots of "don't lie to the pilot and fly into the ground when a sensor is busted" ways, but would have required all airlines to re-certify their pilots, which is both expensive and would have caused the airlines to consider airbus and boeing on the merits...
So the MBA's cost the stockholders money there too.
corp accountants don't care about cutting costs, we just care about making sure things are presented/tracked in accordance with gaap
we may help identify/track costs but we aren't usually tasked with cutting costs
And that’s the crux of the problem. They actually need one another but the egos on both sides refuse to acknowledge that.