Is it prudent to permit a BL favorite and boosted sycophant the opportunity to repair a broken organizational structure? BP is complex by design and by intent. Creative ideas and processes that are successful at other operating companies are frowned upon and sabotaged from the get go. Yet other operating companies that manage ex BP assets do so at a profit and discover and exploit the uplift left behind by people like GB
4 replies (most recent on top)
@jc Or she’s keeping him around to be a scapegoat when she needs one.
@a1 I heard through the grapevine that GB couldn’t even articulate to MO how to competently reduce in year CAPEX nor how to create profit without using accounting tricks. The fact she left him in charge of Upstream either means she’s just as ignorant or she’s too cowardly to do what desperately needs to be done. Either way very bad signs for BP.
All BL appointees still at bp are boosted and doing exceptionally well. MO has not yet put her stamp on bp. Now that low oil prices are going to be the norm we will hopefully see constructive changes. BP typically needs an emergent event for it to precipitate any change. Having a strong CEO is not sufficient for the changes needed…no urgency and no accountability with a serious level of complexity…that’s the status quo.
GB professed simplicity yet during asset reviews for both AM and most recently MO GB could not identify or recommend an asset that needs to be divested. GB is a status quo corporate aparachic.