Management Theories and Incident Handling - Montara Oil Spill - Case Study Example

MANAGEMENT THEORIES AND INCIDENT HANDLING Name: Institution: Course: Date: Management theories and incident handling Oils spills are a common occurrence in the world today. The effects of such disasters are long-term and touch on different environmental aspects. The Deepwater Horizon oil spill, popularly known as the BP oil spill started on 20 April 2010 in the Gulf of Mexico; and its effect have since been felt in human life, aquatic life as well as on other aspects of the environment. The spill occurred on the Macondo Prospect owned by the BP and operated by Transocean. The explosion as well as the sinking of the Deepwater Horizon rig resulted in a sea-floor oil mass movement that flowed for about three months. Eleven people were reported missing and the incident is considered one of the largest oil spills in history. There was a discharge of more than 4.9 million barrels of oil. The well was reportedly sealed on 19 September 2010 after several failed attempts, even though there emerged reports in 2012 indicating that the well site was not completely sealed and it was still leaking. Part of the problem was as a result of incompetence of the employees, who placed little emphasis on their job (Kevin, M. 2015). In Australia, a major oil spill was experienced on 21 August 2009. The Montara wellhead platform drill rig, was the company behind the oil spill. The company is owned by PTTEP Australasia. It suffered a well head accident that resulted in too much discharge of oil and gas, which was stopped at the start of November the same year. The Australian Maritime Safety Authority was in charge of the response and coordinated it in accordance with the National Plan to Combat Pollution of the Sea by Oil and other Noxious and Hazardous Substances. Other stakeholders in the management of the disaster were the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Art and the company itself. The similarity between the two incidents is the involvement of employees in the occurrence of the oil spill and the role they played in the management and response activities after the event (Birtles, B. 2012). Management of the Montara oil spill was classified into two categories: Immediate short-term activities and weather dispersants. Immediate short-term activities included management activities that were meant to reduce the effects of the spill on the environment, including people and the aquatic environment. Weather dispersants were used to help reduce the effects of the oil spill on the atmosphere. People and aquatic life in the area was temporarily moved while possible causes of the leak were sealed. Attempts were also made to recover oil and at the end of it all, the emergency response was considered successful. Success was specifically at the marine parks of Cartier and Ashmore Reefs, as well as the NW Coast of Western Australia (Birtles, B. 2012). The existence of many organisations in the management of the oil spill illustrates the complexity of disaster management activities in many organizations. This is a problem that is not only in Australia. The National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority (NOPSEMA), the Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA)- a government agency in charge of enhancing efficiency in environmental protection as well as the Australian Marine Oil Spill Centre (AMOSC); combined their efforts with the affected company, keeping in mind the number of employees in the named organizations. Communication was critical to the process of management of the oil spill. A framework was put in place to integrate industry and government efforts to effectively respond and manage such incidents that caused marine pollution and casualties (Birtles, B. 2012) The oil spill was as a result of irresponsible employees, as it was explained by several media. This echoes the management theories X, Y and Z. Theory X, as explained by Douglas McGregor describes people at work, their behaviours and why they work. The theory is based on Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. According to McGregor, employees work to fulfil their needs which are physical needs including the basics: Food, shelter and clothing, safety at level two while seeking love, intimacy and acceptance is at level three. The fourth level comprises of self-esteem, achievement, and respect. At the fifth level, people seek self-actualization. Contingency approach to this problem was favoured because of the need of the situation, requiring responsive management. The applicability of the theory also depended on the cooperative relations between the management and the subordinates. Hence, the work structure is the other aspect of the problem that called for the contingent approach to the situation. McGregor’s Theory X states that workers get motivated by the most basic needs and according to it, employees have a general dislike to work. In his view, workers are lazy and are predictable in avoiding work if they can. This results in poor quality of work if not well supervised, a situation that might have caused the Montara oil spill. The perception that employees seek chances to avoid work results in the need to institute strict and direct supervision (Scott, J. 2005). A manager, in this theory is described as one who is authoritative or autocratic, seeking no feedback or input from the lazy workers as they are assumed to add no value. Most employees in the oil industry are semi-skilled and unskilled; and it might have been the case in the case of Montara. This implies that only the views of the top most management positions count. Workers are also known to be motivated by personal interest. To mean, they seek personal pleasure at all cost, and avoid discomfort (Birtles, B. 2012). The manager of theory X makes greater use of incentive and control programs in providing punishment as well as rewards. Domain of the manager is responsibility, which employees have to avoid. Employees will always shift blame from themselves to any other thing apart from personal responsibility such as inferior employee training, low quality machines, or lack of necessary tools and so, the manager is expected to ensure the environment is fit for work. Training of the employees was only started after the event. The government instituted regular checks on the infrastructure of the company to ensure no other oil spill occurs due to failure of the used equipment. The human resource department was involved to ensure right employees put in the right place at the right time. It is however a reactive way of dealing with predictable challenges. McGregor also developed a contrast theory to theory X known as theory Y. This is an option that the management needed to have used to ensure good preparation for any emergency occurrences such as the spill. Theory Y has a different view of employees, completely contradicting that of theory X. In this theory, employees are seen as self-directed and ambitious individuals (Neider, L, L., & Schriesheim, C. 2010). Employees are also seen as responsible beings, capable of self-motivation. They are needed to have a choice between doing good jobs or bad ones, and according to this theory, employees will always choose to do the right thing, which is doing a good job. Workers will not abandon their jobs in search of pleasure and avoidance of pain, since the good job done, is a representation of self-actualization, a reward and part of human living. The effort they put in their work is a sign of pride, especially if the results are visible. Employees in this theory seek full potential through hard work in their jobs. The rewards they receive are an indicator of a job well done and their professions define them. Management seek the input of the employees, and at the end of the production cycle, they give their feedback as a control measure to ensure future success. There is collaboration between the employees and the management and only a little supervision is required. Workers are seen as important aspects in the production process, and are considered a long-term investment thus, the need to train them, keep them happy and ensure their welfare (Kevin, M. 2015). This could be seen as a positive preventive measure, a set-up in which the employees are free to give their suggestions without fear. Management need to have trust in the employees, and as such, detection of common errors in the system could easily be done. Montara could institute measures such as improved employee selection mechanism, proper training of employees, establishment of a feedback mechanism and development of trust between the management and those in the operational levels of the firm (Tosi, H, L. 2009). Normally, theory X and theory Y are hard to find in operation. Both theory X and Y are extremes, one on the far right and the other one on the far left and thus, theory Z is a compromise of both the two theories. This is the other option that could be used to manage the problem. The extreme management styles in the two theories are normally combined to bring a practical set of ideas that could be combined and used in a in an actual setting like the Montara oil spill (Scott, J. 2005). The theory was developed by William Ouchi, and is sometime seen as management that makes use of the Japanese and American styles. It is a combination that draws the positives and the practical aspects of theories X and Y. William, in his theory encourages the practice of worker participation and importantly considers emphasis on job rotation, loyalty to the company as well as the development of individual employee skills. Employees require reinforcement and a sense of belonging thus, the need to develop functional teams in a company set-up. In theory Z, employees are trusted and are required to do their duties with great care and excellence. The workers have the duty to trust the management to support their efforts by putting proper measures in place such as proper tools, training, and ensuring the welfare of the employees is taken care of (Kessler, E, H. 2013). The response was based on the situation at hand, the oil spill and thus, could be described as a pure contingency approach to management. The management of the crisis made the decision, taking into account the aspects of the oil spill and acting on the key areas of the situation. The response depended on the nature of the problem at hand; a technical problem requiring very technical solutions. All the parties had to be involved, consultations made and thus, participative and facilitative management techniques were vital in solving the problem (Birtles, B. 2015). All the above theories of management got a different viewpoint that presents specific assumptions about employees and why they behave in the way they do. Communication is key in all the theories and in case the firm wants to mitigate the effects of such an occurrence, it needed to put a proper plan that would involve all the stakeholders. Other theories could be used to solve the problem and prevent future occurrences. All the solutions are however considered long term and would therefore, be suitable when used as preventive theories. An example of such theories is the theory of administration by Henry Fayol. Fayol believed that management have five major roles. The roles include planning, organising, commanding, co-ordinating and controlling. Planning anticipates the future and acts accordingly. Organization ensures the acquisition and development of the firm’s resources and assigning to different activities. Commanding involves keeping the business’s actions and processes going smoothly. Co-ordination is the harmonization of the teams’ efforts in an aligned manner to ensure movement towards one direction. Control on the other hand, meand that the activities above are performed appropriately in accordance with rules and procedures (Tosi, H, L. 2009). It is hence, clear that the company and the government agencies could have instituted better and effective preventive measures that would have come handy in case of the oil spill. The choice of the theory to be adopted depends on the circumstances at hand, the resources available and the management. The role of management is critical as well as the structure of the company, which determines the mode of communication to be used. Use of meetings, could be useful in explaining the change in strategy adopted by the firm in solving the current problem as well as prevent the occurrence of future occurrences. Employees need freedom to express themselves, and this could only be done with proper feedback mechanism put in place; that will encourage open communication between the management and those in the operational level. Additionally, training is vital, as most problems occur as a result of incompetent workers. Bibliography Birtles, B.2012. Montara oil spill management. Available from: http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2015/s11254432.htm. [Accessed 20th July 2015] Helms, M. M. 2006. Encyclopedia of management. Detroit, Thomson/Gale. Kessler, E. H. 2013. Encyclopedia of management theory. Thousand Oaks, Calif, SAGE. http://knowledge.sagepub.com/view/encyclopedia-of-management-theory/SAGE.xml. [Accessed 7th July 2015] Kevin, M. 2015. The BP oils spill crisis. Available from: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/bp-oil-spill[ Accessed on 20th July 2015] Neider, L. L., & Schriesheim, C. 2010. The "dark" side of management. Charlotte, NC, Information Age Pub. Schermerhorn, J. R. 2004. Core concepts of management. Hoboken, NJ, Wiley Scott, J. 2005. The concise handbook of management: a practitioner's approach. Binghamton, NY, Best Business Books. Tosi, H. L. 2009. Theories of organization. Los Angeles, SAGE. Read More