The areas from conducting research on the Exxon Valdez oil spill and the further analysis into
problems, decisions, and potential problems matrices allowed for a better-rounded look at the overall
issue. Execution of this problem was poorly constructed similar to the Deepwater Horizon spill. The
massive implications that come from such an event as an oil spill go way beyond money and resources
lost. It truly affects a vast array of life and the standard of living around the area of the oil spill for
potentially generations to come. Furthermore, the decision analysis and weighing the difference
between musts and wants had the biggest impact on personal growth in regards to decision making.
Through use of the matrices it became evident …show more content…
Instead he
thwarted his own purpose of owning up to the problem and causing even more resentment for that
action. Preemptive analysis of operating an oil rig could have helped with the case of the Exxon Valdez
as well. A thoroughly detailed KTPPA for issues surrounding the operation of an oil rig could have
drastically helped in both cases. The laissez-faire attitudes of high executives in response to the oil
spills as well as zero tolerance safety regulation could have helped with so much of the damage control.
To further that thought, the Exxon Valdez knew the course it was taking and in 1989 knew the risk it
was taking by avoiding icebergs only to drive so hard into a reef that it caused years of problems
(RCAC, 2016, p.1).
The KT situational analysis considers the level of severity for timing, trend, and impact of
problems that are broken down from the case study. When the case is first read it beings to be
unmanageable when all problems come to light and it seems impossible for a solution to be revealed.
Going through the motions of the matrix it can start to be discerned what needs to be accomplished …show more content…
In the findings of this case the problem is not that
the tanker is stuck in the reef, but rather where exactly it is damaged and how the loss of oil will cause
slippage.
The most significant breakthrough came from the decision analysis. The matrix ensures that the
final solution is one that not only meets all required aspects but also takes advantage of the best
allocation of less desirable outcomes; the wants section. It became clear that a better understanding of
the musts and wants needs to be defined or the overall best solution may not be the best solution in real
life. What this means is that in the matrix provided the best decision mathematically was not necessarily
the best decision for the ecosystem or local wildlife, but rather the benefit of Exxon financially. This is
under the assumption that the fish had to be released because of its vast quantity and that it would be
expensive to relocate. Adding another must in that matrix to be, “Protect further damage on economy
and tourism of the locals” would have changed the final findings drastically.
Practical applications of the analysis frameworks will surely build on a problem many share
problems, decisions, and potential problems matrices allowed for a better-rounded look at the overall
issue. Execution of this problem was poorly constructed similar to the Deepwater Horizon spill. The
massive implications that come from such an event as an oil spill go way beyond money and resources
lost. It truly affects a vast array of life and the standard of living around the area of the oil spill for
potentially generations to come. Furthermore, the decision analysis and weighing the difference
between musts and wants had the biggest impact on personal growth in regards to decision making.
Through use of the matrices it became evident …show more content…
Instead he
thwarted his own purpose of owning up to the problem and causing even more resentment for that
action. Preemptive analysis of operating an oil rig could have helped with the case of the Exxon Valdez
as well. A thoroughly detailed KTPPA for issues surrounding the operation of an oil rig could have
drastically helped in both cases. The laissez-faire attitudes of high executives in response to the oil
spills as well as zero tolerance safety regulation could have helped with so much of the damage control.
To further that thought, the Exxon Valdez knew the course it was taking and in 1989 knew the risk it
was taking by avoiding icebergs only to drive so hard into a reef that it caused years of problems
(RCAC, 2016, p.1).
The KT situational analysis considers the level of severity for timing, trend, and impact of
problems that are broken down from the case study. When the case is first read it beings to be
unmanageable when all problems come to light and it seems impossible for a solution to be revealed.
Going through the motions of the matrix it can start to be discerned what needs to be accomplished …show more content…
In the findings of this case the problem is not that
the tanker is stuck in the reef, but rather where exactly it is damaged and how the loss of oil will cause
slippage.
The most significant breakthrough came from the decision analysis. The matrix ensures that the
final solution is one that not only meets all required aspects but also takes advantage of the best
allocation of less desirable outcomes; the wants section. It became clear that a better understanding of
the musts and wants needs to be defined or the overall best solution may not be the best solution in real
life. What this means is that in the matrix provided the best decision mathematically was not necessarily
the best decision for the ecosystem or local wildlife, but rather the benefit of Exxon financially. This is
under the assumption that the fish had to be released because of its vast quantity and that it would be
expensive to relocate. Adding another must in that matrix to be, “Protect further damage on economy
and tourism of the locals” would have changed the final findings drastically.
Practical applications of the analysis frameworks will surely build on a problem many share