The Deepwater Horizon Case Study

In this case study, we will analyze how BP caused systemic damages to a lot of stakeholders through the Deepwater Horizon crisis. We will analyze how the organizational culture of an organization shapes the behavior of its people and in order for this to change, the management team needs to take the right actions. In addition, we are going to think about how we should proceed if we want to implement a radical change program at BP following such a crisis. 

                                    Keywords: leadership, management, crisis, radical change.

Considering the leadership styles from this week’s reading, evaluate which one would be the most beneficial to execute radical change within the organization as it is described in the case study.

According to Rowe, Reardon, and Bennis (1995) who developed the Leadership Style Inventory (LSI), there are four leadership styles: commanding, logical, inspirational, and supportive. In this given organization, there is a need for a leader who has a mix of commanding and logical. The commanding leader will focus on results, will persuade by directing, will make changes rapidly and will learn by doing (Reardon, K. K., Reardon K. J., & Rowe, A. J., 1998, p.132). This is important because the nature of the business is very risky, the types of individuals that work in this business are very difficult to manage and if the leader isn’t able to command his team with authority in a stressful situation, then the whole team will suffer the costs of poor leadership. In addition, the leader who will lead BP’s team must be logical. This industry is highly technical and there is a lot of rational and systemic thinking that is required in order to identify solutions. This company is focused on process management and the leader must be able to cope with this rigor.



Then, assume that the organizational culture is still similar today. How would you recommend that the organization implement a radical change process from fossil fuels to renewable energies? In other words, how would you address each of the five stages of organizational change?

The company needs to redefine its corporate values. The safety culture survey showed that BP culture is not obsessed by safety which is alarming (Ingersoll, C., Locke, R., & Reavis, C., 2012, p.5). BP works in a high risk industry. When they make a mistake, the consequences are disastrous. For a company with the ability to create so much damage when they mess up, it’s very dangerous for the CEO to encourage its staff to take more risk (Ingersoll, C., Locke, R., & Reavis, C., 2012, p.3). In order to change from a company that works with fossil fuels to renewable energies would mean a complete revamp of the company’s brand identity and what its core values. The CEO of the company would need to embrace a new way of doing business and that is respectful of the environment and all stakeholders. It may require that the company looks for a new CEO that would be able to walk the talk. The technical aspect would be dealt with by the engineering teams and senior management. The biggest challenge would be to change the corporate culture and the public image and then to walk the talk in the long run by building a new brand identity. In addition, I believe that the management team should instill a “what is the worst case scenario if I mess up?” mindset in their staff. Those who work with BP should be obsessed by security, accuracy and engineering prowess. However, they will focus on the things that the management will tell them to focus on and for which they may be incentivize on. 

In addition, BP should stop leasing employees from other organization. This create chaos and confusion. Moreover, these artificially assembled teams aren’t able to develop a synergy and a good team spirit. Furthermore, with different individuals with different corporate cultures and methodologies, there is going to be clashes regarding who is in charge and who has the right way of doing things. Internal competition may override team work and collaboration.



I would address the five stages of organizational change by:

1)     Planning: Take time to think about the main issues of this company

2)     Enabling: Meet with employees irrespective of the hierarchy to discuss my plans

3)     Launching: Implement the roadmap – step by step and being mindful of risks

4)     Catalyzing:  Communicate on the progress made to inspire and keep a positive spirit across the organization

5)     Maintaining: Ongoing monthly meetings in order to keep the momentum going

Conclusion           

Radical change leadership tends to be considered when it’s too late. Leaders in all types of organizations make wrong decisions. However, leaders who work for organizations like BP must be more careful because when they fall it resonates across the world. Leaders tend to make use of radical change when they are forced to as a last resort. People are known to resist change and leaders must learn how to persuade their followers that the change will be beneficial to them and the whole organization. They must be change agent well before external circumstances compel them to change. By driving change proactively, they are in a better position to face future disruptions in their industry.

References

Ingersoll, C., Locke, R., & Reavis, C. (2012).  BP and the Deepwater Horizon Disaster of 2010. Cambridge, MA. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License. Retrieved from https://mitsloan.mit.edu/LearningEdge/CaseDocs/10%20110%20BP%20Deepwater%20Horizon%20Locke.Review.pdf

Reardon, K. K., Reardon K. J., & Rowe, A. J. (1998). Leadership styles for the five stages of radical change. Acquisition Review Quarterly, 2. Retrieved from, https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/2ce9/d455805aa59af93ded632f478bdefdbdc0e0.pdf

Rowe, A. J., Reardon, K. K., & Bennis, W. (1995). The leadership style inventory. Developed at the University of Southern California Marshall School of Business.