Attacking Culture to Address Problems – British Petroleum

I weighed in late on the Gulf Coast disaster – and my impressions of British Petroleum.  I wanted to be thoughtful, as the ramifications of this will be with us for decades.  Compared to the hurricane that wrecked New Orleans this situation is far worse.  Many more businesses are being shut down, the ecological disaster is far worse, and the clean-up will take much longer – even though New Orleans is far from a full recovery from hurricane Katrina.  And there was lots (lots) of finger-pointing going around.  It is going to take a lot of money and energy to deal with this mess – and lots of blame-laying (lawsuits) are inevitable

But I'm always the guy looking forward, and that's why my Forbes article, "BP's Only Hope for Its Future," focused on what BP needs to do now to recapture the more than $100B of lost value its investors have suffered – not to mention out-of-pocket cash costs still rolling up.  

There is a raging debate about what investors can expect, as typified by the SeekingAlpha.com article "Where is BP Headed:  $70 or $0?" Unfortunately, most of these articles focus on 2 factors: (a) what are the estimates of cash out to fix the mess and legal battles compared to historical cash inflows from revenues, and (b) contrarians typically think no situation is ever as bad as it initially looks so surely BP is worth more than it's currently depressed value.

Addressing the latter first, I'd recommend investors look at GM, Chrysler, Lehman Brothers and Circuit City.  Things definitely can get worse.  Problems created across years of sticking to an outdated Success Formula, remaining Locked-in to following historical best practices, wiped out their investors.  Things can definitely get worse for BP.  It will not be acceptable for the company to remain focused on "business as usual" hoping to "weather the storm" and allow "things to get back to normal."  That scenario is a death sentence.  We haven't yet seen what new regulations, taxes and restrictions – nor the eventual cost of 20 years of dead seas charged to BP and its industry brethren – will cost.  BP has to make changes if it wants to regain growth – and most likely if it wants to survive.  

And this leads to item (a).  Nobody knows the long-term costs chargeable to BP.  Nor do we know what the future cash inflows will look like.  We don't  know the brand impact.  Nor do we know how changes in regulations or industry practices will hurt cash flowing in the door.  It's the inability of the past to predict the future that makes efforts at cash flow planning mute.  Lots of number crunching isn't the answer – it's understanding that the assumptions could well be seriously changing. There are more unknown variables than known right now.  Which makes it all the more important BP realize it must change it's Success Formula to make sure it not only avoids another disaster, but finds a way to profitably grow in the aftermath of this event and its changes on the industry.

Many are calling for firing the CEO, as 24×7 Wall Street does in "BP Can Deny CEO Departure Story; But Fate Already Set."  I call this the hero and goat syndrome.  Americans like to think that the CEO should be lionized as a hero when results are good, and blamed as a goat when results are bad.  Unfortunately companies rely on lots more than CEOs (despite their pay) for results.  The problems at BP are with the Success Formula – now some 100 years old – and the inability of the total management team to attack old Lock-ins in order to develop something new.  As my last blog pointed out, even HBR doubted there was any reality in the "Beyond Petroleum" headline.

BP must attack its historical ways of doing business.  This isn't just a short-term crisis.  The Gulf disaster is the result of pushing an old Success Formula too far.  Of going into deeper and deeper water, at greater and greater risk, for less and less yield in order to keep finding oil.  Unfortunately BP seems to be viewing this not as an example of what happens when marginal economics keeps you doing the same thing, over and over, even as returns decline.  Too bad, because this is the kind of event that highlights a serious change is needed in BP's future direction.

I was impressed with a Harvard Business School Working Knowledge survey result in "How Do You Weigh Strategy, Execution and Culture in An Organization's Success?"  Respondents overwhelming voted that success requires managing "culture."  And that is largely what BP now needs to do.  The Beyond Petroleum strategy was clearly enunciated, but execution remained focused on the old direction because the culture did not change.  And that's what attacking Lock-ins and implementing White Space is designed to do – move an organization's culture forward by addressing behaviors, decision-making structures and old cost models.

When I was a boy I'd see a tree show foliage problems and my father would say "we might as well cut it down, that tree is dead."  I'd be shocked, the tree looked fine.  But my father, a farmer, knew that the roots had been damaged.  We were just seeing the slow process of death, that might take a year or two.  Fortunately, BP isn't a tree. And although its Success Formula roots are in trouble, unlike a tree they can be changed.  Let's hope the Board takes action to make changes quickly so BP's future doesn't remain completely imperiled.

For more on using Disruptions to address problems listen to my radio Interview "Disrupt to Win." Or listen to a short podcast on how to "Drive Innovation by Disrupting the Status Quo." Or read my CIOMagazine column on how to "Use Disruptions to Move Beyond Legacy" in thinking and planning.

Defend & Extend Disaster – British Petroleum (BP)

Leadership

BP's Only Hope For Its Future

It must throw out its formula for success.

"Beyond Petroleum?" BP looks anything but that now. How could a
company that spent so much money trying to make us think it was
something else remain so tied to, and now so damaged by, that product?
Was it just trying to fool us with those ads? Or is there something more
fundamentally wrong here? Perhaps something wrong in the management
system used not only by BP but by almost all companies today?

That's the first paragraph in my latest column on Forbes.com (Read BP's Only Hope For Its Future here).  British Petroleum's situation was avoidable – if the company hadn't simply remained so dedicated to "Defend & Extend Management" – the practice of doing more of the same because it's what the company does best.  Unfortunately too many companies follow this "best practice," sticking to their "core," and don't use White Space to find new opportunities for growth.  All the way into disaster!

The Harvard Business Review web site describes the mismatch between BP's claim of heading in a new direction versus company reality in "The BP Brand's Avoidable Fall."  British Petroleum's campaign is now a decade old, trying to convince everyone they weren't just an oil company.  Looking back HBR recalls that authors then claimed about BP's campaign "this [strategy] seems to be at variance with organizational reality
and the [firm's] actual identity
….[BP's] stated corporate aim of
being green-oriented…is an aspiration which to us bears arguably
questionable resemblance to near-term reality. At the time,
environmentalists estimated that only one percent of BP's activities
came from sustainable sources…Now, the stark contrast between BP's image and reality has substantially
weakened its reputation
." 

BP simply couldn't quit drilling for oil – because it was so dedicated to Defending & Extending the BP legacy.  So it kept moving into more difficult fields, at higher cost, with lower yields.  Now all those billions of dollars in advertising are lost, along with all the money for the clean up.  Costs it will take shareholders years to recover.  Even while leadership knew it had to move in a different direction – and advertised the need!

The spill costs of course move well beyond BP.  For example, the network of small businesspeople that run BP refilling stations have been hurt as Crain's Chicago Business reported, "Chicago Gas Station Owners Hit By BP Spillover." Miles, and billions of dollars, removed from BP headquarters decisions, thousands of independent small businesspeople are losing revenue, due to the brand destruction created by BP taking greater and greater risks to Defend & Extend their oil business.  Customers have a choice, and when a reputation is sullied many often change suppliers.  Remember how Toyota car sales tanked as reports of their safety mishandling became available?

Despite the problems of Defending & Extending a business, leaders don't give up easilyThe Daily Caller reports "Experts Say Obama's Drilling Plan Could Cause Another Disaster."  Amidst this huge clean-up effort, there are many who want to maintain drilling activity – because short-term they want the jobs and economic benefits such drilling creates.  Just the sort of marginal, Locked-in decision-making that is now hurting BP.  The region is already losing fisherman, tourists and other businesses from this disaster.  When will the Gulf Coast identify other ways to grow besides the economically and ecologically risky deep-water drilling activity? 

BP, and the states affected by this disaster, desperately need to move "Beyond Petroleum."  But doing so will require extensive use of White Space for finding and cultivating new businesses.  It can be done.  Yet so far, despite the horror of this disaster, there is more effort being expended to find ways to continue on the same route than disrupt old behaviors and find new sources of revenue.  Not even a disaster of this magnitude disrupts those really dedicated to Defend & Extend their locked-in success formula.

As the article says, once you succumb to a Locked-in Defend & Extend strategy – like British Petroleum – management just can't help itself but to do "more of the same."  Dedicated to Defend & Extend Management, no company could move "Beyond Petroleum."  Are all (or most of) your resources dedicated to Defending & Extending your legacy business? Do you have White Space in your organization to move beyond your legacy?  Or will it take a disaster to demonstrate how risky your strategy has become?