‘
‘
March 21, 2017
‘
<'">
0
Case Study Analysis
0
Case Study Analysis
Case Study Analysis* As an outside consultant it looks like there were many things that contributed to explosion and resulting disaster
* Negligence
* Institutional failure
* Poor management
* BP management put emphasis on controlling costs
* BP wanted a stronger performance culture and to monitor and reduce expenses for more efficiency
* Managers had incentive to finish job ASAP. Quality didn’t matter as much. The job was 43 days overdue with a cost of 500k each day it was delayed
* Concerns over safety of casings for well ignored
* Unexpected bursts of gas from drilling were ignored
* Leaks in the blowout preventer were ignored
* Incorrect use of cement was ignored
* BP blatantly used a third of the required centralizers to stabilize well because it would take too much time and cost too much to install the correct amount
* Poor test results of cement ignored
* Lack of a clear leader; confusion about who was in charge
* As mentioned above this was a clear case of negligence, poor management, institutional failure, and a company just trying to cut corners to save money
* An investigation by an independent firm is necessary from top to bottom to see who knew what and who did things the right or wrong way legally, ethically, and morally
* Any manager that knew about the shortcomings listed above and ignored them needs to be let go
* Unless they were directly ordered by management to ignore things, any employee who knew about the shortcomings and did nothing to try and fix or report it needs to be let go
* A new management team and team of employees needs to be brought in for future jobs and to help fix this disaster
* This new team needs to consist of managers and employees who are competent, loyal, and ethically and morally sound
* There needs to be a new reporting system introduced to the company where there are many checks and balances so blatant negligence or accidental negligence like this cannot happen
* Finally, before any of the managers and employees who knowingly contributed to this disaster are let go they need to be held accountable and play a huge role in helping clean up and fix the mess or present them with legal and financial consequences if they do not face them already
3 )Identify the problem from your assigned point of view
BP’s Management pressure
BP’s lack of following guidelines
Reduce cost for more efficiency, but cut quality and safety precautions
Identify the most important facts
“blowout preventer” that was supposed to seal the well in an emergency and was found to be leaking fluids on three different occasions
delay in the testing of the blowout preventer
allows BP to use a lower pressure by 3500 PSI
Name your assumptions
Testing would have been more accurate if we used more pressure
After finding the first leak the engineers should have looked into a better fix
After the second leak the project should have been on hold until the problem was fixed
After the 3rd leak the project should have been shut down
Negligence from BP to take these results and redesign was the cause
List your criteria for an effective response
Emergency Precautionary should have been designed for this situation
The command should have been established
BP should have taken the information they were given more serious rather than a dollar value
BP should have met minimal legal requirements
Work should have been completed per the specifications
Three alternative solutions
Safety Guidelines trainings for extreme emergencies
MMS should shut down the project completely after the 3rd leak until it was re-engineered or installed per specifications
Corners should not be cut to finish the project when working on something so dangerous.
4) Gulf Resident
COLLAPSE
Identify the problem: As a Gulf resident, I believe the problem was that BP (& whoever else was really in charge) was thinking only of how the company would benefit from the rig. They were not thinking about the dangers it could bring to the environment and people around it.
Identify the most important facts: To me, the most important facts are the ones showing how BP was authorizing its workers to perform work that was noncompliant of the rules and regulations. I also believe the notes written in the logs by others are important since they were the ones witnessing it all happen.
My assumptions: BP was clearly not following the stated rules and regulations for a proper oil rig. They were being greedy trying to finish processes faster to save money, even though they were warned by others that what they were doing isn’t safe.
My criteria for an effective response: From now on, BP (and all other oil rigs/major jobs like that) need to be monitored closely to make sure that all of the correct precautions are being taken. BP officials that were managing the oil rigs at the time need to be fired.
Three alternative solutions: 1) Oil drilling rigs need to have inspections completed often to ensure everything is correct and safe. 2) There needs to be a designated leader who is in charge if an emergency were to ever happen. 3) Only one or two organizations should be directly involved with the activities going on on the rig. This could reduce confusion.
Previous answers to this question
This is a preview of an assignment submitted on our website by a student. If you need help with this question or any assignment help, click on the order button below and get started. We guarantee authentic, quality, 100% plagiarism free work or your money back.
Get The Answer Case Study Analysis
‘
‘
March 21, 2017
‘
<'">
0
Case Study Analysis
Case Study Analysis* As an outside consultant it looks like there were many things that contributed to explosion and resulting disaster
* Negligence
* Institutional failure
* Poor management
* BP management put emphasis on controlling costs
* BP wanted a stronger performance culture and to monitor and reduce expenses for more efficiency
* Managers had incentive to finish job ASAP. Quality didn’t matter as much. The job was 43 days overdue with a cost of 500k each day it was delayed
* Concerns over safety of casings for well ignored
* Unexpected bursts of gas from drilling were ignored
* Leaks in the blowout preventer were ignored
* Incorrect use of cement was ignored
* BP blatantly used a third of the required centralizers to stabilize well because it would take too much time and cost too much to install the correct amount
* Poor test results of cement ignored
* Lack of a clear leader; confusion about who was in charge
* As mentioned above this was a clear case of negligence, poor management, institutional failure, and a company just trying to cut corners to save money
* An investigation by an independent firm is necessary from top to bottom to see who knew what and who did things the right or wrong way legally, ethically, and morally
* Any manager that knew about the shortcomings listed above and ignored them needs to be let go
* Unless they were directly ordered by management to ignore things, any employee who knew about the shortcomings and did nothing to try and fix or report it needs to be let go
* A new management team and team of employees needs to be brought in for future jobs and to help fix this disaster
* This new team needs to consist of managers and employees who are competent, loyal, and ethically and morally sound
* There needs to be a new reporting system introduced to the company where there are many checks and balances so blatant negligence or accidental negligence like this cannot happen
* Finally, before any of the managers and employees who knowingly contributed to this disaster are let go they need to be held accountable and play a huge role in helping clean up and fix the mess or present them with legal and financial consequences if they do not face them already
3 )Identify the problem from your assigned point of view
BP’s Management pressure
BP’s lack of following guidelines
Reduce cost for more efficiency, but cut quality and safety precautions
Identify the most important facts
“blowout preventer” that was supposed to seal the well in an emergency and was found to be leaking fluids on three different occasions
delay in the testing of the blowout preventer
allows BP to use a lower pressure by 3500 PSI
Name your assumptions
Testing would have been more accurate if we used more pressure
After finding the first leak the engineers should have looked into a better fix
After the second leak the project should have been on hold until the problem was fixed
After the 3rd leak the project should have been shut down
Negligence from BP to take these results and redesign was the cause
List your criteria for an effective response
Emergency Precautionary should have been designed for this situation
The command should have been established
BP should have taken the information they were given more serious rather than a dollar value
BP should have met minimal legal requirements
Work should have been completed per the specifications
Three alternative solutions
Safety Guidelines trainings for extreme emergencies
MMS should shut down the project completely after the 3rd leak until it was re-engineered or installed per specifications
Corners should not be cut to finish the project when working on something so dangerous.
4) Gulf Resident
COLLAPSE
Identify the problem: As a Gulf resident, I believe the problem was that BP (& whoever else was really in charge) was thinking only of how the company would benefit from the rig. They were not thinking about the dangers it could bring to the environment and people around it.
Identify the most important facts: To me, the most important facts are the ones showing how BP was authorizing its workers to perform work that was noncompliant of the rules and regulations. I also believe the notes written in the logs by others are important since they were the ones witnessing it all happen.
My assumptions: BP was clearly not following the stated rules and regulations for a proper oil rig. They were being greedy trying to finish processes faster to save money, even though they were warned by others that what they were doing isn’t safe.
My criteria for an effective response: From now on, BP (and all other oil rigs/major jobs like that) need to be monitored closely to make sure that all of the correct precautions are being taken. BP officials that were managing the oil rigs at the time need to be fired.
Three alternative solutions: 1) Oil drilling rigs need to have inspections completed often to ensure everything is correct and safe. 2) There needs to be a designated leader who is in charge if an emergency were to ever happen. 3) Only one or two organizations should be directly involved with the activities going on on the rig. This could reduce confusion.