marketing

xxxxxi
assignmentexamplepdf.pdf

Running Head: BP MACONDO WELL CASE REPORT

1

Boston University

MET AD 642 Project Management

2018 Summer Term 1

Assignment 2

BP Macondo Well Case Report

Louis Degrandpre

Running Head: BP MACONDO WELL CASE REPORT

2

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................... 3

Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................. 4

Summary of Issues ................................................................................................................................................. 4

Alternative Solutions ............................................................................................................................................. 5

Alternative Solution Pros and Cons .................................................................................................................. 5

Alternative Solution Matrix ................................................................................................................................. 6

Alternative Solution Ranking .............................................................................................................................. 6

Recommendations................................................................................................................................................... 6

References ................................................................................................................................................................. 8

Running Head: BP MACONDO WELL CASE REPORT

3

Executive Summary

The BP oil spill that occurred in 2010 caused extensive damage to the environment and

the company’s reputation. The events leading up to the Deepwater Horizon disaster can be

attributed to the poor management of the project. There are significant issues within the plan that

should have been addressed to avoid a disaster of this magnitude. Issues include [the student

goes on to briefly list the three top issues in this section of text that I have replaced so that your

own original ideas go here] This paper addresses potential solutions to these issues and weighs

the pros and cons of each solution.

Running Head: BP MACONDO WELL CASE REPORT

4

Introduction

In 2010, the BP oil spill and Deepwater Horizon disaster caused significant damage to the

Gulf of Mexico and its ecosystem. There were many issues and discrepancies within the project

that cumulatively led up to the disaster. Projects never fail from only one reason. They fail due to

multiple reasons that often appear to intermingle. (Cerpa & Verner) In this paper we will be

discussing three major project issues that have been identified within the “BP and the Deepwater

Horizon Disaster of 2010” that led up to the explosion and oil spill. Solutions and their pros and

cons will then be introduced along with recommendations of how the disaster could have been

avoided.

Summary of Issues

Issue 1

The student spent about three paragraphs describing Issue 1.

Issue 2

[The student went on to describe the second issue in about 3 short paragraphs.]

Issue 3

Lastly, the third issue with the project is [The student went on to detail the third issue in a

couple of short paragraphs, including inline references]

As mentioned previously, project management requires careful strategies and techniques

to address all competing priorities. The fact is, an experienced manager will be able to juggle

competing priorities within a project and meet or surpass customer expectations. Project

managers must commit significant time to ensure productivity. (Kress, 1994) Project

management oversight is needed to secure favorable outcomes for the project and the company.

Running Head: BP MACONDO WELL CASE REPORT

5

(Baram, 2003) Without proper oversight and seasoned project managers, the risk of failure can

increase, especially for large or already risky projects.

Alternative Solutions

Issue#-Solution# Solution

1-1 The student inserted a very brief (1 sentence) description of the first solution

to Issue 1.

1-2 The student inserted a very brief (1 sentence) description of the second

solution to Issue 1.

2-1 The student inserted a very brief (1 sentence) description of the first solution

to Issue 2.

2-2 The student inserted a very brief (1 sentence) description of the first solution

to Issue 2.

3-1 The student inserted a very brief (1 sentence) description of the first solution

to Issue 3.

3-2 The student inserted a very brief (1 sentence) description of the second

solution to Issue 3.

Alternative Solution Pros and Cons

Solution Pros Cons

1-1 – Value

Scope

 By consolidating the company

values and incorporating safety,

they will be easier to understand

and follow.

 The company will be more

unified in what their goals and

objectives are.

 It will likely be a large project

that will take workers away from

their existing tasks.

 May cost money to hire a

consultant.

 

 

 

 

Running Head: BP MACONDO WELL CASE REPORT

6

IN THIS SPOT THE STUDENT PUT THE PROS AND CONS MATRIX

Alternative Solution Matrix

This student added an optional Alternative Solution Ranking – very nice

Alternative Solution Ranking

Solution Likelihood of

Success

Difficulty

Implementing

Solution Score Solution Rank

1-2 – xxxxxx 5 5 20 1

3-2 – xxxxxx 4 4 16

3-1 – xxxxxx 4 3 12 3

2-2 – xxxxxx 3 3 9 4

2-1 – xxxxxx 3 2 6 5

1-1 – xxxxxx 2 1 2 6

Recommendations

From the information from the Alternative Solution Matrix, we can see that the solutions

with the highest likelihood of success are also the most difficult to implement. However, the

outcome of the solutions will be worth the time, money, and effort invested if it will provide

viable change within the organization and prevent another disaster. Another future disaster can

cause exceedingly large monetary losses and irreparable damage to the company’s reputation.

Based on this, the solutions are recommended to the company based on the ranking reflected on

the in the Alternative Solution Ranking. The investment into the top three solutions of xxxxx,

xxxxxx, and xxxxx will build a strong foundation for BP and lead to better decisions being made

Running Head: BP MACONDO WELL CASE REPORT

7

about risk management and safety throughout the entire organization. This focus will reduce and

mitigate future disasters and will help BP rebuild their company reputation.

Running Head: BP MACONDO WELL CASE REPORT

8

References

Baram, G. (2003). Project management oversight: An effective risk management tool. AACE

International Transactions, RI31-RI035.

Cerpa, N. & Verner, J. (2009). Why did your project fail? Communications of the ACM, 52(12),

130-134.

Ingersoll, C., Locke, R. M., Cate, R. (2012). BP and the Deepwater Horizon disaster of 2010

[Case Study]. MIT Sloan Management.

Fellague, M. & Bennafla, K. (2015). Organizational culture and the implementation of total

quality management in Sonatrach (Medgaz project as case study). Indian Journal of

Management Science, 5(1), pp.1-11.

Flyvbjerg, B. (2013). Quality control and due diligence in project management: Getting

decisions right by taking the outside view. International Journal Of Project Management,

31(5), 760-774.

Hofstede, G. (1998). Think locally, act globally; Cultural constraints in personnel management.

Management International Review, 38, 7-26.

Kress, R. (1994). Quality project management: Key success factor to exceeding buyer values.

Industrial Management, 36(6), 22.

McCabe, D. (2002). 'Waiting for dead men's shoes': Towards a cultural understanding of

management innovation. Human Relations, 55(5), 505-536.