Leadership Theory of British Petroleum - Essay Example

?Running Head: Leadership Theory Leadership Theory [Institute’s Leadership Theory This paper will determine the situation of British Petroleum after the destruction of Gulf Spill and reaction of leaders towards the situation. It will open up many new facets of leadership and suggest ways to improve the conditions of British petroleum. This paper also talks about the impacts of Gulf Spill on individuals related to British Petroleum i.e. its employees, stakeholders and customers. Moral Accountability of leaders and managers at British Petroleum is also a part of this paper, which helps knowing the level of Moral Accountability in the organization. Lastly, it describes a Leadership Model, the use of which could improve the current scenario of British Petroleum and contributes in achieving stability after huge annoyance from all directions. Moral Accountability Issues at British Petroleum Moral accountability is one’s ability to decide what is good and what is wicked. For organizations, it is their rules and regulations, strategies and policies and actions of management, which shows that whether the organization is on the path of morality or not. British Petroleum like many other organizations has several issues regarding Moral Accountability that deteriorate their reputation and weaken the trust of their employees. One major issue pointing out low moral accountability in British Petroleum is the killing of eleven workers and churn out of more than four million barrels of oil from Macondo well into the sea. This happened due to crash of various processes and equipments, which the experts did not maintain and investigate earlier. If they had done so, the results would not be that precarious (Krigsman, n.p, 2010). Another problem was stoppages of key disconnect system, which could have stopped the flow of oil, but unfortunately it did not work due to outburst and blowout preventer did not receive the signals. Moreover, the automatic closure system also did not work which created a big question on the upholding and testing of blowout preventer technology (Walsh, n.p, 2010). BP furthermore experienced disappointment from its remote operated vehicles, which should have worked on shear rams to close up the pipes of oil. The reason for this failure also remains a mystery. All these machinery problems are not merely results of technology failure but real causes must be the people who had the duty of taking care of all the machines responsible for saving human lives in danger (Walsh, n.p, 2010). However, they did not consider themselves accountable for loss of human lives, which resulted in this incident. This shows that British Petroleum did not have strict rules and regulations pertinent to taking care of emergency machines and systems, indicating less accountability for moral issues. Impacts of Low Moral Accountability in British Petroleum Now, the important matter is that what influences a rig operator will have after the occurrence of such big destruction. Undoubtedly, he would not like to work at such a perilous place because he must have lost his trust in the technology and take a long time to recover from this dilemma (Bower & Gilbert, pp. 427-428, 2005). It would be very difficult for him to get his trust back and start working at British Petroleum or any other organization having same technologies or procedures. Another major accountability problem of British Petroleum is the decreasing value of its shares. If a person has invested a huge amount in shares of British Petroleum that he has a major income stream from its shares, then he is going to be in a great danger because after the accident of oil, the value of its shares has decreased 39 percent. People invested in shares of British Petroleum have long lasting impacts of this incident because they invested almost half of their savings, which no more remained savings. In this way, British Petroleum lost the trust of many retirees of UK and became injurious for their invested money. Moral Accountability issues were evident from these two incidents and pointed out the leadership issues behind these problems (Fullan, pp. 1-6, 1998). Perspective of leadership Leaders in any organization play an important role in getting the right things done so that there remains no pitfall of any danger or uncertainty. A genuine leader confronts facts; unzip all the data of a situation completely in front of stakeholders, and represent accountability (Edland, pp. 1-5, 2008). A leader does not try to lessen the level of a problem or guarantee action quicker than it is possible to deliver it. A true leader sets realistic expectations and fulfils them. Leaders do not drop their responsibilities by playing a blame game, rather take the burden on their shoulders, and give comfort to others. People do not wait for miracles to happen. Happening of incidents in not abnormal, incidents take place. However, stakeholders should take every possible step to put off the incidents from happening and then try getting them out of danger if they happen. When incidents take place, a true leader should make an apology rapidly and take charge of improving them. The main concern of true leaders is sufferers; they try their best to mitigate the loss of victims because they have true feelings for them, they understand their emotions and consider them as part of their own lives (Greenleaf & Spears, pp. 23-28, 2002). Leadership at British Petroleum In such a situation, leaders should take steps keeping this thing in mind that what is best for institution and its stakeholders at this moment. Nevertheless, Tony Hayward’s actions have not shown any of the above characteristics (Kanter, n.p, 2010). I agree that he was not the only person responsible for managing the crises but his contribution could have urged all the other managers and leaders to perform their part in bringing the company back to its previous position (Northouse, pp. 22-23, 2009). Hayward became Chief Executive Officer of British Petroleum in 2007 to curtail the pasting of reputation, which occurred due to a refinery explosion took place in Texas in 2005 (Guiliani & Kurson, pp.416, 2005). It made the company fined with an amount of $87 million by OSHA because British Petroleum failed to exact the safety desecrations. Moreover, in 2006 there was a pipeline leak in Alaska, which caused $20 million as criminal penalties for not refurbishing the corrosion. Hayward joined in on a pledge that he would change the culture of organization and stress on safety. However, neither did he do something great at that time nor did at Gulf Spill. Tony Hayward and many other people blamed Transocean for Gulf Spill because rig was their responsibility and the equipment failed which upset Hayward. Haliburton the company who had the duty of wall cementing was also putting blame on others. Hence, every leader was blaming another leader for this destruction; no one was ready to accept the blame and strive to better off the conditions of British Petroleum. If a leader does not consider his own self as accountable for something wrong, then he had no right to blame others for this (Guiliani & Kurson, pp.416, 2005). Because, if one thinks that one has no mistake then how could he tell someone to be on the mistake (Gardner, pp.15-16, 1993)? Kotter’s 8 Step Change Model- Implementing Change Powerfully and Successfully at British Petroleum There was a great need of bringing change in the environment of British Petroleum after great destruction, which degraded the morale of workers, did not meet the expectations of people and put a black spot on the reputation of organization. Nevertheless, it was not the end, spirit and motivation can change any situation in the world, and the best way to implement change is Kotter’s Eight-Step Change Model- ‘Implementing Change powerfully and successfully’ (Northcote, pp. 39-79, 2008). This model firstly emphasize on creating urgency to bring change. In terms of British Petroleum, there was surely an urgent need of bringing change but no one was ready to put this statement in the minds of employees and other managers. This was the responsibility of leader i.e. Mr. Hayward to tell the people that we need to get out of this situation as soon as possible. However, he himself was blaming others to be the cause of this destruction. Had he took the step of urging people to bring change in any way they can; it would surely work in benefit of the organization. “Any way” indicates that even a small employee could create awareness in people about usualness of happening of such events but why would he do that? His boss did not instruct him to do so (Lussier & Achua, pp. 30-150, 2009). This seems to be very small but sometimes even small things play an important role in altering a situation from wrong to right and this is in the hands of leaders to make these small things happen. This strategy would help to create goodwill about the company and attract new employees in the field of engineering because after gulf spill most of the skilled engineers did not prefer joining BP as it had risks. Secondly, Kotter (Northcote, pp. 39-79, 2008) believes in Powerful Coalition that is bringing people together and making them go in the right direction by appointing a leader amongst them. The duty of that leader would be to create optimism in employees and people of his group towards change. The leaders must be some influential personalities who possess the ability to motivate people and have superiority over other employees. Superiority should not only be in terms of job title or position but also in terms of knowledge, skills, and dexterity. Thirdly, Kotter (Northcote, pp. 39-79, 2008) emphasized on creating a vision in the minds of people, which would motivate them to bring a change (Koestenbaum, pp. 41-62, 2002). Vision refers to a particular position where one wants to see the company. This would help employees understand what are they actually bringing change for, what is their ultimate goal and what would be the situation after such struggle. Moreover, if they have clear vision in their minds they would continuously look for the ways to achieve this vision. It is obvious that different thoughts about one vision and one thought about vision makes a difference. Everyone would have his own way to achieve the goal and ultimately the goal will be achieved using one or the other way. For British Petroleum, leaders could have communicated to employees to bring in new employees in some particular fields regardless of the method they chose to do so. “Since, Stewart Johnston, an oil and Gas consultant for Molten Group, warns the consequences of staff shortages could be dire. They have 40 major projects coming on stream over the next five to seven years to replace 1m barrels of daily production. If they do not have the in-house people they will need to outsource, and that will cost” (Boxell & Crooks, 2010). Fourth point in Kotter’s Model (Northcote, pp. 39-79, 2008) is similar to third one; the difference just lies in frequency of communicating the vision. Companies should keep on repeating their visions to the employees so that they stay fresh in the minds of employees. Moreover, repetition shows the importance of something and urges people to carry out it (Kellerman, pp. 60-61, 2010). Removing Obstacles (Northcote, pp. 39-79, 2008) is the fifth point mentioned by Kotter, it says that if company has reached to this stage then it should look for any barriers coming in the way of change. Identifying barriers can also be one of the major tasks for a company like British Petroleum. However, proper methodologies can help BP achieve this. It can give survey forms to its employees and other major members of the company. In these forms, employees can mention the problems they face and the assistance they expect from the company to solve these problems. After analyzing the survey, companies should take major steps to remove the obstacles mentioned by the employees so that a sense of trust regarding company is created in them. Nothing motivates more than success is the sixth slogan of Kotter (Northcote, pp. 39-79, 2008). British Petroleum could make short-term goals for the employees so that they get motivated after accomplishing them. These short-term goals include getting a bonus on bringing in any new employee or giving an excellent idea pertinent to safety of BP. This would be encouraging for those who do not have interest in long-term goals considering them as exhausting. In seventh step, Kotter (Northcote, pp. 39-79, 2008) argues that many change plans fall short because victory is stated before time. Actual change needs time. Quick wins are only the commencement of what is required to attain long-term change (Gallos, pp. 1-3, 2008). Launching one product using a system is great but if that system makes you launch five other new products then the system is actually working. To get the actual success constant change and improvement is very necessary. Lastly, to make any change fasten, it should turn out to be part of the heart of an organization. An organization’s corporate culture often indicates the thought behind all the policies of an organization so they must be structured in a way that they prompt employees in a day-to-day schedule to bring change. Leadership after Gulf Spill British petroleum tried to get out of the crises with the help of media and other sources rather than solving them, which according to me was the biggest mistake done by the leaders of BP. There are some problems that cannot revolve but, Tony Hayward did not understand this fact rather he had worsen off the situation with his inability to understand the public reactions. Other leaders such as Barack Obama, Chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg and the leader of Transocean were equally oblivious at this time because instead of getting together and solving the problem they all were going in different directions (Corkindale, n.p, 2010). This discrepancy further contributed in deteriorating the reputation of British Petroleum. The responsibilities of leaders to build flourishing businesses, create jobs, and distribute shareholder profits were kept aside. They did not remember that true leaders are building blocks of their organization and must lead for the longer term. They should have had this thought in the mind that if BP goes out of business because of this spill then it’s the leaders of BP who have failed to perform their jobs. Although leadership was not present in BP and other political leaders throughout this crises but, there was no lack of leadership amongst the community people and volunteers who showed their excellent leadership qualities in trying to alleviate the losses of spill. They did not care for themselves while saving the wildlife and cleaning up the mess of oil. They performed the duties of actual leaders as they cared about environment and living of people. Had the elected leaders seen just once these community people they would have definitely adopted some leadership qualities from them (Grint, pp. 50-83, 2010). This shows that leadership is not only found in the people in big organization but it is present in every common individual, one just needs to unveil it. Suggestions for Improvement British Petroleum should make a leadership model keeping its structures and methods of working in mind. Obviously, the model would not be perfect because no one gets all the right things and there are always unanticipated and accidental occurrences but genuine leadership is distinct when responds phenomenally to an unexpected crisis. As British petroleum is technologically based company, the model should be applicable to the company’s people and systems, and should have a strong foundation. Moreover, BP was initially established in Alaska and North Sea and now it is working at many new countries such as “Russia, Azerbaijan, China, Indonesia, Angola, Trinidad, and Algeria” (Steffy, pp. 132-133, 2010). Therefore, this leadership model would encompass the aspect of diversity as well because it is very important for a leader to understand the differences between employees and assign them work accordingly (Hitt, Ireland & Hoskisson, pp. 273-274, 2010). Tony Hayward could have applied this technique after Gulf Spill by assigning individuals work which they had interest in, this would make them work rapidly and passionately. The model would also cater the methods to use when the organization is in a sudden danger similar to Gulf Spill (Ireland & Hitt, pp. 63-77, 2005). These methods will prove to be very helpful at the time of danger because managers will not have to think about the steps to take rather they would already have in their minds that what to do. This will reduce the time taken to get out of the danger and save many resources and labor. Model should also emphasize on the point that accountability of employees should be personal and should not be given to teams or groups (Howatt, pp.20-23, 2008). However, teamwork plays an important role because listening to the ideas of others contributes in making a wise decision as each individual has a particular mindset and pattern of thinking. No one knows which idea would prove to be prolific for the organization therefore respecting others opinions should be a core value of the organization. The decision made by one person is only successful when the whole team is associated (McConnell, pp.45-46 2007). The leaders must know that their leadership is in the check of useful delivery and to attain this they must hold up their teams while not dodging their own accountability (Draft, pp. 15-16, 2007). They need to take time to bring the organization into line in order to achieve the desired goals. The commitment of as many individuals as possible by distributing the authority and accountability, this will give them room to use their own creativity to solve problems in their own way (March & Weil, pp. 6-10, 2005). Leadership model will also focus on the idea that nothing can be achieved sustainably devoid of seeking help from all the other individuals working with you. The leadership traits in British Petroleum should be described through an apparent model, analyzing how each individual is pertinent to this model. Company should develop the employees with training and give them rewards for showing good performances so that they remain motivated (Raatma, pp. 5-24, 2003). Personal View of Leadership Leadership is not about your needs, your desires, your wants, and your life; it is all about the people living around you. To be a successful leader, one needs to ignore oneself and think about the organization. Leader should have the ability to coach people i.e. showing them the ways to improve themselves and find out a gem in them. In addition, leader should not remind his employees that he is their boss rather behave with them as their own friend, this would create the trust in employees for leaders, and they will work with their whole heart. Leaders have capability to find out the strengths of people and constantly appreciate them on their achievements so that they get a motivation to work. Leaders mostly revolve around Ls; they look for right people, they laugh with them, they learn from them, they love them and they live for them. Leaders possess the power to change a person’s life completely without letting the person know about it. The essence of leadership is to bring a change in peoples’ lives Leaders might not have any formal authority to do it as they usually have good relationships with people and to give credit to others is their virtue, which naturally make them authoritative on others. Although, they are good with people, they have to maintain their remoteness to keep the charisma of leadership alive. This somehow makes their work easy because remoteness gives them opportunity to ponder upon the things and come up with great ideas that encourage people to accomplish their tasks. Furthermore, a leader has an immense impact on an organization because he is the one, who motivates people to work, encourage them to do better than before, makes them look at the positive sides of things, and indirectly contributes in the productivity of an organization. It is not necessary that a leader become successful in all the work that he does, but it is definite that he will keep on trying even after many failures, which makes them charismatic. British petroleum needs to have such leaders then the day is not far when it will get its previous charm back. Leaders are not super human beings but they just try to give their hundred percent in every task they perform which makes their work extraordinarily superb. It is not very difficult to be a leader, one just need to patient and hardworking because patience is very important if a person wants to take his organization to soaring heights of success and hard work is the only way, which will make you achieve what you dream. References Bower, J. L., & Gilber, C. G. 2005. From Resource Allocation to Strategy. Oxford University Press. Boxell, James and Crooks, Ed. 2010. Inside BP: A giant wounded. Retrieved on September 18, 2011: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bded3254-9048-11df-ad26-00144feab49a.html#axzz1YhCG5tAd Corkindale, G. 2010, June 28. Five Leadership Lessons from the BP Oil Spill. Retrieved on September 18, 2011: http://blogs.hbr.org Daft, Richard L. 2007. Management. Cengage Learning. Edlund, D. C. 2008. Transformational Leadership. Leadership, 1-5. Fullan, M. 1998. Leadership for the 21st Century: Breaking the Bonds of Dependency. Educational Leadership , 1-6. Gallos, J. V. 2008. Business leadership: A Jossey-Bass Reader. John Wiley and Sons. Gardner, J. W. 1993. On Leadership. Free Press. Greenleaf, R. K., & Spears, L. C. 2002. Servant leadership: A Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness. Paulist Press. Grint, K. 2010. Leadership: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press. Guiliani, R. W., & Kurson, K. 2005. Leadership. Miramax Books. Hitt, M. A., & Ireland, R. D. 2005. Achieving and Maintaining Strategic Competitiveness in the 21st Century: The Role of Strategic Leadership. The Academy of Management Executive (1993-2005), 63-77. Hitt, M. A., Ireland, D., & Hoskisson, R. E. 2010. Strategic Management: Competitiveness & Globalization, Concepts. Cengage Learning. Howatt, William A. 2008. Leadership Vs.Management. Way with Words. Kellerman, B. 2010. LEADERSHIP: Essential Selections on Power, Authority, and Influence. McGraw-Hill Professional. Kenter, R. M. 2010, June 7. BP's Tony Hayward and the Failure of Leadership Accountability. Retrieved on September 18, 2011: http://blogs.hbr.org/kanter/2010/06/bps-tony-hayward-and-the-failu.html Koestenbaum, P. 2002. Leadership: The Inner Side of Greatness : A Philosophy for Leaders. John Wiley and Sons. Krigsman, M. 2010, June 11. BP oil spill: Leadership and IT failure. Retrieved on September 18, 2011: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/projectfailures/bp-oil-spill-leadership-and-it-failure/9901 Lussier, R. N., & Achua, C. F. 2009. Leadership: Theory, Application, & Skill Development. Cengage Learning. McConnell, Charles R. 2007. The effective health care supervisor. Jones & Bartlett Learning. March, J. G., & Weil, T. 2005. On Leadership. Wiley-Blackwell. Northcote, Jane. 2008. Making Change Happen. Jane Northcote. Northouse, P. G. 2009. Leadership: Theory and Practice. SAGE. Raatma, L. 2003. Leadership. Capstone Press. Steffy, L. C. 2010. Drowning in Oil: BP & the Reckless Pursuit of Profit. McGraw-Hill Professional. Walsh, B. 2010, May 18. Some Success in the Gulf — and Trouble in Washington. Retrieved on September 18, 2011: www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1989803,00.html Walsh, B. 2011, April 20. The BP Oil Spill, One Year On: Forgetting the Lessons of Drilling in the Gulf. Retrieved on September 18, 2011: www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2066233,00.html Read More