Force Field Analysis Model for BP

Change Management - Change Plan

Feasibility Analysis

Driving Forces

The proposed change at BP appreciates the need for fast tracking the process and ensuring that the existing problems are addressed urgently. One of the driving forces is the existence of a court case against the company and the possible penalties they may have to foot. The other driving force is the existence of a relatively new Senior Team heading the company. Most of them are unsure if there is any job security since the previous company heads were removed in a somewhat unprofessional manner for non-performance. Another challenge acting as a driving force for the proposed change is the Gulf Oil Spill (Freudenburg, & Gramling, 2011). The crisis showed clearly how the company's management was indulging in corrupt practices that often dented their image. However, the crisis can act as an avenue for the change in company's direction and success in the oil industry. Additionally, technological innovation among employees at BP is the best key driver in the situation. All other key drivers are related to the technical innovation. Each change pattern starts with a technical discontinuity (Wales, Gorman, & Hope, 2010). Cost reduction, quality improvement, and the need for BP to become an industry leader.

Restraining Forces

The proposed change at BP is essential in redefining its destiny and performance in the oil industry. However, the existence of obstacles otherwise known as restraining forces can never be ignored. First, it is always important to appreciate the fact that the underlying culture amongst employees may make it hard for a change to be instituted. All employees, whether junior or senior fear change because it may jeopardize the chances of their growth within the company. The expected fines from the pending court case may limit the financial capability of the company in implementing the proposed change (Freudenburg, & Gramling, 2011). Besides, the development of various departments within the proposed change plan means that there will be additional overhead costs for the company. It will be a tedious process to attune costs and benefits associated with the new plan hence becoming somewhat challenging in the short run. The other restraint factor arises from the fact that the top-level management and the employees in the lower ranks at BP are not in good terms because of communication breakdown. The top management is known for disregarding some of the critical proposals coming from the junior employees. Such a restraining factor may mar the prospects of having a flawless implementation process for the proposed change at BP (Wales, Gorman, & Hope, 2010).

Force Field Analysis Model

Restraining forces

Culture, Resistance to change, poor communication

Higher

Equilibrium

Driving forces

Gulf Oil Spill, Job security for the senior team, the court case, innovation

Lower

The goal: To institute a change at BP's workplace environment by fixing the existing problems and redefining the company's future.

Criteria / Restraining forces

Score

Culture,

1-2-3-4-5

Resistance to change,

1-2-3-4-5

Poor communication

1-2-3-4-5

Criteria / Driving forces

Score

Gulf Oil Spill,

1-2-3-4-5

Job security for the senior team

1-2-3-4-5

The court case,

1-2-3-4-5

Innovation

1-2-3-4-5

The relative strengths of the restraining and driving forces are clear from the table. The restraining forces appear to bear much strength unlike the driving forces meaning that the management will struggle in establishing an equilibrium point at which the change will occur. In the process, new restraining and driving forces may emerge. It will require the efforts of the management and other specialists spearheading the change to ensure that a balance is always attained between the two factors. During the implementation process, the level of productivity will be attained and sustained when employees are made to appreciate the need for the proposed change. Balancing culture and innovation will create an equilibrium point at which the change process can be effected since they have similar weighted strength. Challenges arising from communication will be balanced off with the benefits of the court case since the company has the opportunity to clear its name. Besides, employees will be further motivated to work hence resulting in the balance between the two forces. Employees will also have to be guaranteed about their jobs security and will always work for the good of the company. Corrupt practices will be reduced or even eliminated hence showing some send of equilibrium.

Strategies to reduce the impact of the opposing forces