BP and the Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

BP and the Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill - see ExampleSecondly, there is the complex management structure at the site as BP, Halliburton and Transocean never seemed to be fully in synch with each separate (Roberto 10-12). Thirdly, there is BPs own internal complexity. On the foot of the case it could be argued that BP and the other parties involved exploited this complexity to downplay business morality. With business ethics out of the way, BP continued to make a series of bad decisions that have eventually led to this disaster. In general, there are two kinds of complexity an inevitable or naturally occurring one and a impulsive or unnecessary one. With the former one has to come to terms with, while the latter needs to be addressed. This disaster could have been avoided if all four parties had tackled the self-generated complexity. However, as we believe, they did not do so because they chose not to take into account the possible effects of their decisions on other stakeholders. T hey were only concerned with their bottom lines. conclusion for this is shown in Exhibit 3. The exhibit highlights nine crucial decisions regarding the Macondo that were made with the view of saving time and saturnine cost at the expense of more(prenominal) utilitarian alternatives (Roberto 19). Business ethics includes principles and values used to persuade the activities of an organization and manage the workforce. Business ethics raise the question of decisions to be made when one faces good or ethical problems. One of the theories often used to explain business ethics is the principle of utilitarianism. harmonize to utilitarianism, ones obligation or duty in any situation is to perform the exploit that will result in the greatest possible balance of good over evil. Utilitarianism calls for considering the interests of everyone before taking a decision. Decisions by BP as when the company dismissed Schlumberger personnel before they could perform cement testing, and othe r decisions shown in Exhibit 3 were clearly taken with only the interests of the company in sight. This question of ethics and utilitarian principle seems to bedevil BP more than the other parties. One could argue that the oil rig hooker and Halliburton chose to lower their standards or cede to BPs demands even where they had doubts because they cared more about their paychecks than the possible cost of the exit in case of an incident. In a way, these providers opted for a higher-risk operation in order to retain BP as a client regardless of having misgivings. BP, though, seems to have had a history of repeat disasters, with its management doing little to disallow them from occurring. For example, BPs failure to correct sufficiently the problems at its Texas City refinery even after receiving recommendations from the US occupational Safety and Health Administration demonstrates disregard for business ethics (Roberto 7). Lastly, it is also evident that BPs leadership lacked both tact and sensitivity, two critical attributes for a leader who believes and practices the principles of utilitarianism. Senior leadership has a mass of bearing on the attitude, behavior and manners adopted by the rest of the staff. Tony Haywards decision to go yachting with his son at the height of the crisis and to issue a late and half-hearted apology avows whose interests he considers more important. The staff looks up to the leaders and mimics them. Company men are especially vulnerable to this because they are more engrained into the