Thread regarding BP PLC layoffs

Reorg ideas

Proposed reorg to save Meg some time: Step 1. Merge P&O, G&LC and Technology into one business (2 EVPs can walk with all the entourage), merge C&P and T&S, get rid of EVP level positions for the rest of the org. Saves min £20m pa on the headcount with improved efficiency and accountability. Get rid of strategy function completely - it has been a failure. Strategy should be driven by BUL leadership and segment EVPs not central function..same for RC&S teams - its a testament to the weakness of the EVP that they still exist. Same for Ventures - no new businesses came out of it in 20 years of its existence so its an ego satisfying project for the execs but no real value generated and a distraction for the businesses.
Step 2. Get rid of functional organisation and organise by Business Unit structure, with clear P&L accountability. No central functions that do not feed directly into a specific P&L. Desperate measures for desperate times but company needs to put profits into the cornerstone of performance and current structure is way too broad to enable such focus. BULs will start cutting costs when they have full control over it.. Step 3. Very light exploration and central subsurface team which will enable new growth (outside of existing basins, otherwise driven from BUs). Any other ideas?


by
| 1691 views | | 9 replies (last March 15) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1khgmfay7

9 replies (most recent on top)

I worked in 4 other companies and see a lot of opportunity to reduce the legal function. They have way too much authority and make unrealistic risk decisions. Cut the department in half, especially the legal team supporting P&C (JM). Don’t see any value and they probably cost bp a lot…

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @46e+1khgmfay7

We don't have an organizational structure problem. We have a people competence and motivation problem. Meg will work with the leadership team to rank each and every employee and then discard the bottom 10% - 20%. Once this is done, most of the whining on this website will evaporite.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1dz+1khgmfay7

Company should be split into thee parts to leverage its core competency.
Part A lights money on fire
Part B plans reorg of Part C
Part C plans reorg of Part B

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @mb+1khgmfay7

Great deadwood replies

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @gh+1khgmfay7

We also have all these “country” organizations that don’t actually do anything, but have headcount, cost money and insist on giving input which slows everything down and adds complexity. US and UK are the biggest examples. Just let the regional businesses do their work and get ride of the country orgs.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bt+1khgmfay7

There are indeed too many entities for the size of the company

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bk+1khgmfay7

Light subsurface? Has that ever occurred? First thing Meg should do is join an asset subsurface connect unannounced. This will be eye opening and will initiate the required sense of urgency and accountability. Meg will need to reevaluate the two Paleogene development projects and possibly ramp up one and differ the other.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @b7+1khgmfay7

No management consultants...ever.. anywhere..

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @av+1khgmfay7

Why technology goes into P&O?

I would say there is a clear reason for technology (how would you even manage and negotiate cloud cost and cybersecurity?), people, legal, Finance to be centralized, and strategy to an extent (they of course need to be heavily integrated).

Some of the points I agree with

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ag+1khgmfay7

Post a reply

: