Abstract
APOC, founded in 1909 as Anglo Persian oil company, was bought by England over more than 51% of its stock when it was about to fail on the initiative of Winston Churcill. It was subsequently privatized by the Thatcher campaign in the 1980s and soon became a major oil and refining company, with interests in clean blacks (such as solar panels) and attention to security procedures. But is all this enough for such a global company?
Introduction
BP, over time, suffered from a chain of major accidents: the first in the series in Texas a BP refinery in 2005 exploded killing 15 people and injuried another 180 (Ingersoll, Locke, Reavis 2012), the big problem was related to the lack of maintenance and safety, which is strange for a company …show more content…
If we follow the timeline in the 80s, CEO Horton cuts costs and increases the response speed of managers, turning hierarchically structured departments into smaller, more flexible teams (Ingersoll, Locke, Reavis 2012). Furthermore, this meant that employees at various levels were encouraged to make decisions and responsibilities, a program also pursued by CEO David Simon in the 1990s (Ingersoll, Locke, Reavis 2012). Basically this was the basis. Great attention paid to great responsibilities, all worked without strict protocols and the excellent standard of BP went down a lot. it is undeniable that this position is a core of what happened. The attitudes and behaviors of the leaders were disappointing and irresponsible (Corkindale, 2010), in addition, CEO Tony Hayward presided over an organizational culture of extreme risks, ignoring expert advice, not paying attention to security (Corkindale, 2010); moreover, they have tried to work with those more relaxed in this ecologic disaster, rather than face it directly, being weak as leadership, looking for an excuse rather than fighting to restore the …show more content…
Working hard on new commitments, the leader, based on the 5 stages of development of Bruce Tuckman could ensure a firm support for BP: Train (to share all information with the various managers at the beginning, starting to define objectives and methods), Storming (in whose ideas and problems are raised in the management of risks and dangers for BP), Norming (establishing the new roles, now the various managers under the leadership work in a cohesive manner for BP), Execution (each member has his hierarchical role and plays his roles with the rest of the group, achieving the objectives of excellence and security BP), Updating (obtaining and making known the final result of the work sharing with others) (Hanks,
APOC, founded in 1909 as Anglo Persian oil company, was bought by England over more than 51% of its stock when it was about to fail on the initiative of Winston Churcill. It was subsequently privatized by the Thatcher campaign in the 1980s and soon became a major oil and refining company, with interests in clean blacks (such as solar panels) and attention to security procedures. But is all this enough for such a global company?
Introduction
BP, over time, suffered from a chain of major accidents: the first in the series in Texas a BP refinery in 2005 exploded killing 15 people and injuried another 180 (Ingersoll, Locke, Reavis 2012), the big problem was related to the lack of maintenance and safety, which is strange for a company …show more content…
If we follow the timeline in the 80s, CEO Horton cuts costs and increases the response speed of managers, turning hierarchically structured departments into smaller, more flexible teams (Ingersoll, Locke, Reavis 2012). Furthermore, this meant that employees at various levels were encouraged to make decisions and responsibilities, a program also pursued by CEO David Simon in the 1990s (Ingersoll, Locke, Reavis 2012). Basically this was the basis. Great attention paid to great responsibilities, all worked without strict protocols and the excellent standard of BP went down a lot. it is undeniable that this position is a core of what happened. The attitudes and behaviors of the leaders were disappointing and irresponsible (Corkindale, 2010), in addition, CEO Tony Hayward presided over an organizational culture of extreme risks, ignoring expert advice, not paying attention to security (Corkindale, 2010); moreover, they have tried to work with those more relaxed in this ecologic disaster, rather than face it directly, being weak as leadership, looking for an excuse rather than fighting to restore the …show more content…
Working hard on new commitments, the leader, based on the 5 stages of development of Bruce Tuckman could ensure a firm support for BP: Train (to share all information with the various managers at the beginning, starting to define objectives and methods), Storming (in whose ideas and problems are raised in the management of risks and dangers for BP), Norming (establishing the new roles, now the various managers under the leadership work in a cohesive manner for BP), Execution (each member has his hierarchical role and plays his roles with the rest of the group, achieving the objectives of excellence and security BP), Updating (obtaining and making known the final result of the work sharing with others) (Hanks,