3

CASE STUDY

Institution's Name:

Student's Name:

Date:

Question 1:

The critical success risk factor is usually used to measure the ability to handle risk in any organization. The CSF highlights essential factors an organization should mandatorily possess to mitigate various risks. In this case, study, The Critical Success Risk Factors play a significant role. To begin with, the British Petroleum facility in Texas experienced an explosion in 2005. This should have led to an alteration in how they operated (Shekari et al. 2019).

The initial step in the CSF is for an organization to provide support to their pool of employees. In the British Petroleum case in 2005, the explosion did not provide a suitable environment for their employees. The organization paid more focus on making profits at the expense of employee safety. Their stock price decreased by 7 dollars after the explosion. Top management struggled, putting a Band-Aid to the problem rather than finding a suitable solution to it. Employees were not well equipped on how to properly handle and respond to explosions. Likewise, after the incident, the organization did not train the employees since they were ignorant that they had a problem (Shekari et al. 2019).

The majority of organizations often conduct training for their employees based on resonant from the unhateful event to prevent further occurrence. Since they feared that their stock price could experience another further drop, they dint pay attention to the company problem. After an investigation chaired by the BP with the former Secretary of state's assistance, John Baker, an independent investigation was conducted by Hazard (Shekari et al. 2019).

Investigation Board and the US Chemical Safety: It was found that BP had been ignorant in their operations. The investigation between BP and Baker made it appear like the organization's operations were on par with the federal safety implications. However, this was proved otherwise by independent investigations (Shekari et al. 2019).

Through the research conducted, it was discovered that the safety deficiencies were apparent to all levels s of the organization. It was clear that British Petroleum was more concerned with profit maximization motive as opposed to employee safety. No evidence of formal or on-job-training was provided. The focus was more on productivity. According to Critical Success Factors, it is recommended to have competent personnel at all organization levels to mitigate risks (Shekari et al. 2019).

. If training were conducted, British Petroleum operation could have been efficient, which could have led them to focus more on employee safety instead of profits. It was apparent the focus for-profits cost them more since stock value decreased as a result of the 2005 mishap as well as the Deep Water Horizon (DWH) explosion and oil spills. Concerning supporting infrastructure, they had expanded their branches to many parts of the world. Since some of their locations were not that stable, they were used to taking several risks. It began with oil exploration in the Middle East. The region was rampant with internal conflicts during that time, which they knew from the beginning. They accepted any risk that would arise therein seems they had a strong belief that the only way to be successful in business is to take risks. From the start, this idea created an environment for oil exploration and its production (Shekari et al. 2019).

Their main aim was to engage in whatever it takes to increase the barrels they daily produced. Although the main aim of British Petroleum was to produce oil, views changed as soon as John Browned was hired as a chief executive officer who ended up changing the organizational culture of BP. John Browned did not only shift focus on creating more alternative energy but also focused on employee safety (Shekari et al. 2019).

Question 2

The advantage of British Petroleum (BP) aggressiveness created an opportunity for control over their operations. They were willing to venture into parts of the world that seemed unfavorable for business. British Petroleum (BP) explored over 25 countries, which produced more than 4 million barrels daily. They had the willingness to enter into risky ventures in a bid to grow their organization. In as much as the risk they took brought specific negative impacts, their success is owed to the risks they took. BP was willing to adopt change in the organizational culture of the oil industry by advocating for change (Schneider et al. 2018)

The corporation is dedicated to providing appropriate vigor replacements inside the oil industry. It has established this by investing 80 million dollars in vigor replacements such as airstream, solar power, standard gas, and biofuels. The strength has also stood rummage-sale in evolving energy knowledge used in the placement of new vigor sources. The examination and manufacture segment brands up the upriver doings of BP while conveying oil over pipelines, delivery and railroad make up the midway doings. BP's advertising doings comprise the publicity and vending of usual gas and oil products (Schneider et al. 2018).

John Browned thought of BP as being socially responsible. They became the first oil organization to publicly announce that they are to create more alternative energy and invest in environmental protection. John Browned was interested in improving the organization's mage since they were under scrutiny. Texas refinery, which was acquired by British Petroleum in 1999, became the third-largest refinery in the United States. The organizations had prior occurrences, which led to the 2005 explosion, which could have given rise to specific issues (Schneider et al. 2018).

Question 3

The first action that British Petroleum should execute is to engage in how to improve its infrastructure. According to the Finical Times, several BP defects were pointed out that could have been addressed promptly. BP could have created better working environments for their employees since it encompasses the risks. BP needs to shift focus from business expansion in various parts of the world to improve the pre-existing facilities they host. The implication of this is that workers will have a sense of pride since the organization cares about their safety (Haer et al. 2019).

Secondly, British Petroleum should organize training and safety talks. For instance, if an employee dies in a mishap, that incident should be thoroughly reviewed and used as a training tool. This can prevent the occurrence of similar risks in the future. The military applies this technique in their various branches. From past mishaps, they conduct training to come up with best practices. If such an occurrence happens again, they will have safety stand-down from the operation to aid in the operations' reassessment. The main objective is to determine the cause of the incident and address it effectively. British Petroleum they have failed to implement policies that need facilities to investigate mishaps and conduct, which will prevent them (Haer et al. 2019).

Finally, British Petroleum needs to have continuity with the rest of their facilities within America. The BP case study suggests, "Each refinery has its own separate and distinct process safety culture." It further states that some refineries promote employee safety while others do not meet the standard. In my opinion, we should look for an independent organization that will develop a safety audit and conducts safety audits of its facilities. Both safety stand-own and training should be carried out at each facility to reaffirm the British Petroleum stance on safety with their employees' pool (Haer et al. 2019).

Question 4

The first risk category that is evidenced with BP is operations management. It was clear that the management had failed to take corrective measures to prevent future occurrences of the same events. Level two categories could have consisted of facility supervisors and corporate supervisors. The next category would be internal factors. It is no doubt that the working environment was impoverished. BP was under a lot of pressure to produce oil. Due to this, they ended up making irrational decisions since they did not welcome the idea of losing their jobs.

Question 5:

A supplementary controlled procedure includes using lists of possible risks and assessing whether person proceedings strength occurs on the scheme. Some businesses and businesses grow risk checklists founded on knowledge from past schemes. These lists can oblige the scheme boss and scheme team to classify both clear dangers on the list and increase the thoughtful of the side. The scheme team's past knowledge, scheme knowledge inside the business, and manufacturing specialists can be valued capitals for classifying possible danger on a scheme (Schneider et al. 2018).

The chance valuation includes estimating the likelihood of a risk occurring. The influence valuation approximations the belongings of a dangerous occasion on a scheme impartial. These influences can be together optimistic and undesirable, i.e., chances and intimidations. The scheme objects are many, e.g., the schedule, cost, excellence, and possibility. For respectively recognized danger, the influence and likelihood are measured. Meetings and conferences with knowledgeable scheme members, investors, and specialists in the topic are the foundation for the influence and likelihood valuation. These influences and likelihoods are valued, and their equality is measured. The dangers which obtain high assessments are examined additional, or a suitable response is deliberate. The little valued jeopardies do not need direct action but must comprise the nursing risk record (Schneider et al. 2018).

Risk avoidance frequently contains emerging an alternative plan with an advanced probability of achievement but typically at an advanced cost related to achieving a development task. A mutual risk evasion technique is to use established and current skills rather than adopt new methods. However, the new methods may demonstrate the potential of healthier presentation or low costs. A scheme team may choose a seller with an established track record over a new seller if significant value incentives to evade the risk of employed with a new seller. The scheme team that needs drug testing aimed at team memberships is working risk evasion by avoiding injury done by somebody under medication inspiration (Haer et al. 2019).

Question 6:

Conclusion:

BP has remained regarded to be one of the leading oil creators in the creation. The corporation's sturdy monetary, corporeal, and humanoid resources allow it to make high incomes and proceeds. The corporation's revenues limits have increased over the ages as the importance of manufacturing examination doings and ecological skimming doings. The scrutiny of the manufacturing has also allowed the corporation to grow business policies that have allowed it to uphold its development over the ages. However, it is still the leading tertiary producer of oil and standard gas; the corporation is pitching itself to be the leading player. It lasts to invest deeply in harmless vigor replacements and renewable vigor skills.

REFERENCES