Action Case Presentation

8/7/2019 Action Case Presentation

1/22


2/22

PRESENTATION OVERVIEW

Conclusion


3/22

One of the world's leading international oil and gas companies; providingcustomers with fuel for transportation, energy for heat and light, retail servicesand petrochemicals products for everyday items

The BP group operates across six continents, Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe,

North America and South America and its products and services are available inmore than 80 countries. The values, the code of conduct under which thecompany operate and the BP brand define what the company stands for and howthey run the business

BP wants to be recognised as a great company competitively successful and aforce for progress. Their fundamental belief is that they can make a difference inthe world

BP helps the world meet its growing need for heat, light and mobility and striveto do that by producing energy that is affordable, secure and doesnt damagethe environment

Hydrogen testing and exploration is a major strategic effort and this has beenapproached in partnership with several stakeholders

COMPANY OVERVIEW


4/22

COMPANY OVERVIEW

QUICK FACTS & FIGURES

Sales and other operating revenues $297,107 million (year 2010)

Replacement cost profit $4,519 million (year 2010)

Number of employees 79,700 (at 31 Dec 2010)

Proved reserves 18,071 million barrels of oil equivalent

Retail sites 22,100

Upstream Active in 29 countries

Refineries (wholly or partly owned) 14

Refining throughput 2,426 barrels per day (year 2010)


5/22

SWOT ANALYSIS

Positive NegativeInternalFactors

Strengths

Dominant market position Vertically integrated operations

Global presence

Weaknesses

High project start-up costs New entrant into mature industry i.e. bus

transportation Poor brand management (on-going

controversies and public criticisms) Poor Corporate Responsibility image

Exte

rnalFactors

Opportunities

New market trend for more fuelefficient and environmentallyfriendly vehicles

Niche markets i.e. hydrogen buses(hydrogen seen as the fuel of thefuture)

Increased mileage with hydrogenfuel

Absence of noise reduction innoise pollution

Develop a solution for Londonstransport system less vehiclesand emissions

Improved Brand Image and PublicPerception

Threats

Hydrogen is expensive to create as well asstore, it is an explosive substance

Hydrogen buses way more expensive than

traditional diesel buses 800,000 and120,000 respectively

Environmental regulations onlyhydrogen derived from renewable sourcesis free of pollution

Absence of noise liable to create moreaccidents


6/22

PESTEL ANALYSIS


7/22

CASE SUMMARY KEY FACTS


8/22

CASE SUMMARYSTAKEHOLDER PARTNERSHIPS REQUIRED

STAKEHOLDER INTERESTS / BARGAINING POWER

RESIDENTS PERSONAL SAFETY & PRESERVATION OFCOMMUNITY

POWER TO STALL THE PROJECT

REGULATORS SAFEGUARDING PUBLIC SAFETYINFLUENCE OUTCOME & SPEED OF APPROVAL

PROCESS

MEDIA ADVANCING PUBLIC CONCERNS

STRONG INFLUENCERS OF PUBLIC OPINION

COUNCILLORS & POLITICIANS CONSTITUENTS AND RE-ELECTION

NATIONAL SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENTREGIONAL PARTICIPATIONG IN EU

INITIATIVES

BP EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT & PR

TEAM

EFFECTIVE PROJECT MANAGEMENT

ENHANCING BPS BRAND PERCEPTION


9/22

CASE SUMMARY PROGRESS BY PHASE


10/22

CAUSE AND EFFECT ANALYSIS


11/22

PR MANAGEMENT A MAJOR CONCERN The key forces impacting the project dictated the need for effective PR Management

Any trial of a new Technology that came with public risk needed to be properlycommunicated with supporting and convincing justification to alleviate public concerns

Media coverage needed to be effectively managed to ensure the correct messages werebeing delivered at every stage of the project; preventing any negative impact on thecompanys brand and project status

BPs role extended beyond capital funding, the company had access to the most relevant andupdated industry/product data that was needed by key stakeholders to make informeddecisions

Key Forces


12/22


13/22

Kotter and Schlesinger suggests that there are four (4) reasons why peopleresist change:

KOTTER & SCHLESINGER (1979) CHANGE MODEL


14/22

KOTTER & SCHLESINGER MODEL EXPLAINEDThe Kotter and Schlesinger change model discusses six (6) ChangeApproaches to prevent, decrease or minimize resistance to change:


15/22

CONSIDERATION OF LEWINS CHANGE MODEL


16/22

ANALYSIS OF KOTTER & SCHLESINGER MODEL TO CASE


17/22

ACTION LEARNING REFLECTIONSWhat aspects went well.

The Core Profile of the group was ST. The ST trait is a common trait for mostmanagers which was very good for the group; we were all on the same page!

There is a preference for taking in information through the five senses andobserving what is actual. Rational analysis is used to achieve conclusions.

We worked well to divide tasks while trusting each others judgment

Members shared information and in return benefited from the knowledge andexperience of others

What aspects the group enjoyed.

The Action Case was extremely challenging due to the time pressures; however,the group enjoyed the case review

There is now a greater appreciation of models and theories learnt in previousmodules now that they have been reviewed against a real-world situation for itsrelevance

Re-confirmation that our group dynamics remains stable at the Performingstage and works well, even under pressure


18/22

ACTION LEARNING REFLECTIONSOther reflections..

In the Belbins model, there are eight team roles: Shaper (SH), Coordinator (CO),Plant (PL), Resource Investigator (RI), Implementer (IMP), Team worker (TW),

Monitor/Evaluator (ME) and Completer/Finisher (CF)The most preferred roles for the group were IMP and CF while PL and SH were theleast preferred as shown

Based on Belbins model, implementers do not produce good teams collectively.Such a team would get full marks for organisation and effort, but it would be a bitshort on real ideas and once the team had a plan it would push it through at allcosts

Team Member Most preferred role(s) Least preferred role(s)Jason Bowen IMP, CO PL, RIAlison Browne-Ellis IMP, CF PL, SHCarlo Goodman IMP, PL ME, CFSandra Payne IMP, CF PL, SHJacqui Redman CO, CF ME, TW


19/22

RECOMMENDATIONSFor BP to get the extension to planning permission in time to continue operation, thecompany must address and change its Public Relations (communication) strategy.

Grunig and Hunte (1984) define public relations as "the management of communication

between an organisation and its publics". It is a strategic function and can render anorganization effective or ineffective.

Grunig's Four models of Public Relations

Model Name Type of Communication Model Characteristics

Press agentry/publicity

model

One-way communication Uses persuasion and manipulation to influence

audience to behave as the organizationdesires

Public Information model One-way communication Uses press releases and other one-way

communication techniques to distribute

organizational information. Public relations

practitioner is often referred to as the

"journalist in residence.

One-way asymmetrical

model

One-way communication Uses persuasion and manipulation to influence

audience to behave as the organization

desires. Does not use research to find out how

it public(s> feel about the organization.

Two-way symmetrical

model

Two-way communication Uses communication to negotiate with the

public, resolve conflict, and promote mutual

understanding and respect between the

organisation and the public


20/22

ENHANCED PUBLIC RELATIONS MODELAll future communication efforts need to be structured so that the messages are tailored tospecific target groups in order to ensure overall effectiveness of the project.

Due to the negativity associated with the project, moral suasion through key stakeholders will be

necessary. In line with Grunigs PR Model, the enhanced PR strategy is being recommended tomitigate further project impact. Additionally, as PR Consultant, our recommendation is for BP toengage our services for a six (6) month period to guide the formulation of the new PR Strategy.


21/22

CONCLUSION Failure to render an integrated communications strategy resulted in the current project status

Achieving public trust is critical in ensuring the success of the project due to the associatedperceived risk to the residents. This will go along way for future projects

Adopting the recommended strategies will aid BP through this crisis stage and allow them toachieve the planning extension to move the project forward


22/22

REFERENCES

BP Global. http://www.bp.com/bodycopyarticle.do?categoryId=1&contentId=7052055

(Accessed: 16 April 2011).

CUTE. http://grupoulisses.blogspot.com/ (Accessed: 16 April 2011).Electric bus. http://www.tbus.org.uk/leeds.htm (Accessed: 16 April 2011).Grunigs model. http://iml.jou.ufl.edu/projects/Fall99/Westbrook/models.htm(Accessed: 16 April 2011).http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/the-25-best-bp-protest-signs/ (Accessed: 16 April

2011).Hydrogen and fuel cells.http://www.netinform.net/h2/h2stations/h2stationsdetail.aspx?id=51 (Accessed: 16

April 2011).PESTEL http://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/tools/pestle-swot (Accessed: 16 April 2011).
http://www.bp.com/bodycopyarticle.do?categoryId=1&contentId=7052055http://grupoulisses.blogspot.com/http://www.tbus.org.uk/leeds.htmhttp://iml.jou.ufl.edu/projects/Fall99/Westbrook/models.htmhttp://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/the-25-best-bp-protest-signs/http://www.netinform.net/h2/h2stations/h2stationsdetail.aspx?id=51http://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/tools/pestle-swothttp://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/tools/pestle-swothttp://www.netinform.net/h2/h2stations/h2stationsdetail.aspx?id=51http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/the-25-best-bp-protest-signs/http://iml.jou.ufl.edu/projects/Fall99/Westbrook/models.htmhttp://www.tbus.org.uk/leeds.htmhttp://grupoulisses.blogspot.com/http://www.bp.com/bodycopyarticle.do?categoryId=1&contentId=7052055

Documents

Action Case Presentation