Mercy! Mercy! That Dang Nabed PERCY!

The BP Example

Using an everyday Example

Yesterday I talked about the BP Executive, “Shooting from the Hip.“ Please be advised that I am speculating on what happened in the board room and at the Operations meeting….the example I am using is for illustrative purposes only, although I am well acquainted with how decisions tend to get made in a corporate enterprise. In many cases reason is not a part of the process regardless of what people might claim afterwards. Even when the process is used the facts are often ambiguously released to save face and avoid legal implications. What I am discussing comes from the news and I use the example to comment on the process. A wonderful way to understand how the problem solving process works is to see it in the glory of all its warts.

Then problem(s) that BP faces is... They must determine the best way to stop the oil from leaking into the Gulf, mitigate the discharge and compensate the damages.

Facts.

1. A pipe line has ruptured one mile below the surface and is leaking oil.
2. The rate of the leak is sixty-thousand barrels per day. (Number is subject to change and question…however it is a big number.)
3. This is a major oil spill.
4. The BP Management has struggled responding to the problem.
5. The issue has escalated into one of political, environmental, economic and public relations consequence.
7. The solution will take time as measured in months.

Assumptions:

1. The cause of the rupture was either an engineering or human failure:
2. The cause was not a collision…i.e. a submersible.
3. The cause was not a natural phenomenon…i.e. a seismic event…earthquake.
4. The cause was not a terror act of sabotage, corporate or political, .

Courses of Action.

1. Cap the well.
2. Siphoned off the discharge.
3. Drill a relief well.
4. Contain the spread through the use of booms and barriers.
5. Pay the damages.
6. Put someone in charge who knew something about oil wells.

This example shows a full range of the components and the incident is a great illustration of what happens both when reason is at work and when reason is not.

In looking at the problem statement above, it is clear there are problems within problems. How often do we face a problem only to discover that we have to correct issues up the chain of causation before we can solve the problem at hand?

For example suppose the problem is to determine the best way to improve the appearance of our home. In working such a problem it is evident that there are facts and assumptions that frame the solution possibilities.

Let us say that after doing so we come up with three courses of action. We can paint the house, repave the driveway or cut the grass. Suppose we choose to cut the grass and we go into the garage and get the lawnmower. When we attempt to start it we discover it won’t crank. So we have to empty the old gas, replace the spark plug and go out a purchase and can of starting fluid….All this takes time and the point I’m making here is that before we can begin work on a course of action there are often subordinate actions that must be accomplished…i.e. gathering resources.

Speaking of gathering resources…I have to go to the bank and meet a gentleman I am buying a truck from…I know these interruptions can be frustrating for the reader and all I can say is…I wish life wasn’t that way.