Over the last two years, I’ve watched bp stand up a major India hub and enter a $1.5 billion, 5-year deal with Infosys. This was sold internally as a bold strategic shift — one that would centralize delivery, reduce costs, and future-proof our capability model.
The message from leadership was clear:
“Other oil majors are already doing this. We’re just catching up.”
But now, two years in, I have to ask:
What are we really doing — and why?
Because from where I sit, the reality on the ground looks nothing like the strategy decks.
*Hiring in India Has Been a Constant Struggle
Despite all the talk about the size of the Indian talent pool, we’ve had enormous difficulty finding candidates who meet even our baseline hiring standards.
- Candidates using ChatGPT or interview coaches to bluff their way through interviews.
- People who don’t match their CVs or literally aren’t the same person who shows up on Day 1.
- Candidates who turn on their cameras weeks into the job and clearly aren’t who we interviewed.
To meet hiring targets, we’ve lowered our requirements — and at the same time, cut deeply into experienced, high-performing teams in other hubs:
UK, US, Egypt, Azerbaijan, Trinidad, and beyond.
So we’re replacing proven talent with unproven hires, then acting shocked when productivity collapses.
*Delivery Has Slowed to a Crawl
Even when roles are filled in India, the real work isn’t getting done. At least not well — or on time.
- Tasks that used to take hours now take weeks.
- Basic technical capability is missing in many cases.
- There’s little to no understanding of our business, our data, or our operational context.
- Time zone differences ki-l momentum and make collaboration painful.
People in the UK and US are burning out just trying to hand-hold projects to the finish line. Meanwhile, stakeholders are frustrated and confused by why we’re “resourcing up” while performance goes down.
*We Were Late to the Party — and Now It’s Just Getting More Expensive
Shell, Chevron, and ExxonMobil started building up their India hubs years ago. They got in when labor was cheap, the market was less saturated, and the available talent was still fresh.
bp, on the other hand, is showing up years late — and it shows.
- Chevron is poaching talent from Exxon.
- Everyone is chasing the same people.
- Market wages are climbing.
- Turnover is high.
The “cheap labor” myth is dead — at least for us.
What we’re really doing now is paying more for less. And when issues inevitably arise, we blame the teams, not the flawed strategy.
*Now We’re Proposing to Have Consultants Build the Hub for Us?
If that weren’t enough, there’s a proposal floating around to have Consultants (EY/McKinsey) design and build the India hub for us — then sell it back to bp.
Let me be very clear:
This means we would be outsourcing the creation of our outsourcing hub. Paying consulting premiums for someone else to assemble a team, define the structure, and hand it off to us with a ribbon on top.
How is that cheaper? How is that sustainable? How is that ours?
This isn’t global capability building.
It’s outsourced theater.
*So Why Are We Still Doing This?
Because at this point, it's clearly not:
- Faster
- Cheaper
- More reliable
- Or delivering better business outcomes
*So why do we keep doubling down?
- It still looks good in Excel.
Moving headcount to India makes the numbers go down on a cost-center report. But delivery delays, rework, and quality loss don’t show up on a quarterly finance slide.
- We’re locked into vendor deals.
We’ve committed to a 5-year, $1.5 billion Infosys contract. Pulling the plug now would be politically and financially risky, so we keep pushing forward and “managing the problems.”
- Our KPIs are broken.
We reward people for shifting roles to “low-cost” locations and reducing in-region spend. But we don’t hold them accountable for degraded delivery or missed outcomes.
- We followed the herd — too late.
Shell, Chevron, and Exxon had a different context. They moved early. Talent was cheaper. Market conditions were different. We copied the model without asking whether the economics still held up for us.
- Cognitive dissonance.
No one wants to say, “This isn’t working.” So instead of reevaluating, we chase sunk costs, wait for it to magically improve, and quietly shift the burden onto the people trying to keep the wheels on.
The Bottom Line
We stood up a delivery model that:
Costs more than expected
Delivers less than promised
Demoralizes experienced staff
And erodes business confidence
But we keep going, because the numbers look good, the narrative sounds strategic, and it’s easier to stay the course than admit we were wrong.
It’s not too late to course-correct. But it is time to get honest.
Because what we’ve built so far isn’t “future capability.” It’s a high-cost illusion that’s actively hurting bp’s ability to deliver.
And for the record: I’m not being laid off. I’m one of the “lucky” ones still here.But I have zero confidence in where this company is headed. I’m deeply concerned for our future, our ability to operate safely, and what will happen if we face another major incident.
We won’t survive it — not like this
Disclaimer: yes I used AI to help me organize these thoughts. I like my results it says what I want to without being a rambling mess. Don’t discount my points because I used a tool to help me communicate better. (This disclaimer was fully written by me not AI)