Systems Thinking Tools
Discuss about the Systems Thinking for Managing Chaos and Complexity.
This essay is about the systems thinking and the tools and the techniques of the systems thinking in context to the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling. Systems thinking is considered as a holistic approach for the purpose of the analysis which emphasizes upon the manner in which the constituent parts of the system interrelate and in what manner the systems work over a period of time and within perspective of the larger systems. There are different tools and the techniques of system thinking such as brainstorming tools, behaviour thinking tools, structural thinking tools, and computer based tools and help in providing with the information about the interrelationship between the various variables or the systems and the effect of the systems upon the each other (Haines, 1998). These tools can be used in different areas by the organizations. These tools can also be used in combination for achieving understanding about the dynamic behaviour (Authenticity Consulting, 2018). in context to BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling, the absolute mistakes, failure to notice the mistakes and the different factors of risks resulted in well blew out. Moreover, there was a failure of the management and the risks in the engineering which gave rise to the incident. In this essay, the systems thinking is emphasized in order to analyze the failure of management in the case of BP. This essay will present the categories of the tools of the systems thinking and the sub categories of the systems thinking tools that are used by the organization in order to analyze the interrelationship between the different variables or the components.
Systems thinking is an integration approach that is mainly based upon the fact that the different components of the system act in a different way when they are isolated from the environment or the other parts of the system. The practice of systems thinking helps in exploring the perspectives, boundaries and the inter relationships. The system thinking is a useful approach for addressing the complex situations (Gharajedaghi, 2011). The complex situations can be understood in a systematic manner with the help of the systems thinking. It helps in identifying the connection between the elements in order to come up with the supportive actions collectively ( Learning for Sustainability, 2018). It is basically provide the support in the decision making through establishing the understanding of the situation and through evaluate the relationship among the parts of the system. The working of the system can be understood in an easier manner with the help of systems thinking (Rouse, 2018).
Reasons of the Incident/Argument
The systems thinking tools have their own importance alone and are basically developed by the support of each other. These tools can be used in a combination and can help in providing in depth information and understanding (Stroh, 2015).
Brain storming tools: In brain storming tools, double Q diagram is designed to help in looking at the whole system. In this session of brainstorming, both sides of the issue are visible to the people and also remain balanced. It is also known as cause and effect diagram and it provides with the visual map of main factors that are involved. The identification of the factors helps in exploring the interaction among the identified factors (Boardman & Sauser, 2008).
Dynamic thinking tools: The Behaviour Over Time Diagrams are the projections in the form of simple lines and assist in capturing the dynamic associations between the variables.
Apart from this, Casual loop diagrams are used to present dynamic relationships. The structure of the system can be understood by the people through this diagram as it helps in providing with a visual presentation which establishes the communication for the understanding and provide understanding of the complex system in a concise manner. The CLDs can be used in a combination with BOTs in order to develop behaviour pairs and to develop and explain complex dynamic phenomena (Kim D. , 2018).
Systems Archetypes are dynamics that happen again and again in the different settings. It consists of different combinations of reinforcing and balancing loops. It provides with the initial support upon which a clearer articulation of issue can be built (Waring, 1996).
Structural thinking tools: structure behaviour pairs, graphical Function Diagrams and policy structure Diagrams are the building blocks of the computer models. The graphical functions are helpful in providing the clarity of the nonlinear relationships among the variables. The effects of variables are quantified through this function as it is difficult to measure the time pressure and morale (McCaughan, 2018). Structure behaviour pairs connect a particular structure with the corresponding behaviour. The policy structure diagrams helps in representing the processes which drives the policies (Flood & Romm, 2007).
Computer based tools: the computing models, learning laboratories and management flight stimulators are included in this division of tools and demands technical proficiency of highest level. After the development of the tools, little advance training is needed for making use of these tools (Kim, 2016).
In the incident of BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling, it resulted in well blew out because the risk evaluation was inadequate and decisions related to the design of well was managed effectively only in the last stage (Muñoz, 2017). Apart from this, cement slurry designed in an inappropriate was utilized for the purpose to close the bottom of well and it was created without any kind of review by the engineer or the supervisor. The evaluation of the cement seal showed some problems but it was considered as a success because the testing procedures were proceeded by improperly trained key personnel. The procedures were flawed related to securing the well that is – drilling mud was removed from wellbore unnecessarily (Graham, et al., 2011). It would have provided the help in preventing the hydrocarbons to enter in to well, if the drilling mud was left in place and no such blow out would have occurred. The initial signals of the blowout was not considered and no such effective response was given when the blow out began. The carelessness and the improper management and the review by the companies resulted in the blow out of the well (GPO, 2011).
The incident would have not occurred if the risks were identified earlier and the right action plan was developed by the management. It is important to develop the risk management plan in order to attain success in any kind of project because the risks are inevitable. The risks can result in problem or failure or any kind of incident. The continuous evaluation of the processes of the project undertaken can help in identification of the major areas that can create the problem in the completion of the project. Through the reports, it has been found that the failure of the management and the lack of the trained personnel and the most importantly, no such emphasis upon the signals of the blow out were the reasons that caused the blow out of the well.
The proper management of the project is possible when the activities of the project are evaluated on the regular basis. Following the systematic processes and the procedures are important for the success of the overall project and timely completion of the project. The coordination and the proper communication people associated with the project is necessary in order carry out the activities of the project in an effective manner.
The system thinking was not considered by BP which resulted in the blow out of the well. Through the incident, it can be said that there was engineering risk due to which the complex situation came up and gave rise to the incident. The incorrect or inappropriate designs of the cement slurry and the removal of the drilling mud under the supervision of the engineers helped the hydrocarbons to enter into the well. The assessment of the engineering risks is important as the flaw in the designing affects the overall project and can give rise to the negative results. In the case, it has been found that the risk management plan was not appropriately developed and the risk were not identified and evaluated by the supervisors. The systems thinking approach in the project and the use of the system thinking tools during the project was not considered. No such systematic process was used by BP in order to identify the risks and analyze the factors that can contribute in certain incident. It is the priority of the organization to develop the risk management plan in order to accomplish the project without any problem and by reducing the risk. The neglecting of the risks, flaws in the design of cement slurry and the signals of the blow out were the major factor that resulted in the disaster. Hence, the system thinking can provide with the support to identify the interrelationship between the different components. It is important to consider the systems thinking for the organizations and to undertake a project in order to give attention to the feedback and making the righteous decision through analyzing the relationships between the various components.
Hence, in context to the argument that the failure of the management resulted in this incident, the lack of the management of the processes of the drilling, improper designing by the engineers, the lack of the reviews by the engineers, lack of the supervision, ignorance to the signals of the blow out and the improper risk management were the reasons to the blow out of the well. It is the responsibility of the engineers to ensure the flawless design but the defect or the flaw in the design was considered as success as per the report by the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling (Cohen, 2011).
The systems thinking is helpful in providing the support to make right decision through the analysis of the relationships among variables with the help of the tools of systems thinking as the tools are helpful in presenting the information about the inter relationship which give idea about the effect of the components upon each other. The dynamic thinking tools of systems thinking that is Behaviour Over Time Diagrams would have helped BP to identify the association between the variables over a period of time. Likewise, the brainstorming tools’ Double Q diagram could have provided with the both sides of the issue in a visible manner in a balanced manner. This tool provide with the qualitative and quantitative form of the information which makes it easier to look at the whole system and the effect of a system upon the other system. The utilization of the tools would have not resulted in the disaster.
Conclusion
It can be concluded that the systems thinking is the approach that is used by the organization at the time of undertaking any project for analyzing the relationship between the component parts or the variables. The connection among the variables can be identified using the systems thinking. The argument that is the failure of the management is the reason due to which the blow out of the well took place as it is the responsibility of the management to evaluate and review the undertaking project on the regular basis so that the project can be accomplished on time. The lack of the attention on the signals of the blow out was also a reason because no such actions were taken by the management in order to restrict the further incident to happen. The improper training to personnel related to the process and the flaw in the designing of cement slurry by the engineers resulted in the blow out. As per the report of national commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling these reasons behind the blow out was stated. Hence in my perception, it is important for the management to make sure the timely evaluation of the processes and give attention to the risks that come up. Thus the carelessness and the ineffective supervision of the management upon the project resulted in this incident. It is important to conduct regular evaluation on the activities and the processes of the project so that the problems can be resolved within the time.
Learning for Sustainability. (2018). Systems thinking. Retrieved from Learningforsustainability.net: https://learningforsustainability.net/systems-thinking/
Authenticity Consulting. (2018). Systems Thinking, Systems Tools and Chaos Theory. Retrieved from Managementhelp.org: https://managementhelp.org/systems/
Boardman, J., & Sauser, B. (2008). Systems Thinking: Coping with 21st Century Problems. CRC Press.
Cohen, D. (2011). National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling. Retrieved from Tagesschau.de: https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/oelkommission100.pdf
Flood, R. L., & Romm, N. R. (2007). Critical Systems Thinking: Current Research and Practice. Springer Science & Business Media,.
Gharajedaghi, J. (2011). Systems Thinking: Managing Chaos and Complexity: A Platform for Designing Business Architecture. Elsevier.
GPO. (2011). Chief Counsel’s Report | 2011 National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling. Retrieved from Wellintegrity.net: https://www.wellintegrity.net/documents/ccr_macondo_disaster.pdf
Graham, B., Reilly, W. K., Beinecke, F., Boesch, D. F., Garcia, T. D., Murray, C. A., & Ulmer, F. (2011). Deep WaterThe Gulf Oil Disaster and the Future of Offshore Drilling. Retrieved from Gpo.gov: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-OILCOMMISSION/pdf/GPO-OILCOMMISSION.pdf
Haines, S. G. (1998). The manager’s pocket guide to systems thinking & learning. Human Resource Development.
Kim, D. (2018). Palette of systems thinking tools. Retrieved from Thesystemsthinker.com: https://thesystemsthinker.com/palette-of-systems-thinking-tools/
Kim, D. H. (2016). Systems Thinking Tools . Retrieved from thesystemsthinker.com: https://thesystemsthinker.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Systems-Thinking-Tools-TRST01E.pdf
McCaughan, N. (2018). Systems Thinking for Harassed Managers. Routledge.
Muñoz, M. F. (2017). The underestimated value of safety in achieving organizational goals: Case analysis of the Macondo Accident. Retrieved from Sunnyday.mit.edu: https://sunnyday.mit.edu/tafur-thesis.pdf
Rouse, M. (2018). Systems thinking. Retrieved from Searchcio.techtarget.com: https://searchcio.techtarget.com/definition/systems-thinking
Stroh, D. P. (2015). Systems thinking for social change: A practical guide to solving complex problems, avoiding unintended consequences, and achieving lasting results. Chelsea Green Publishing,.
Waring, A. (1996). Practical Systems Thinking. Cengage Learning EMEA.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
