'Deep Water in Deep Trouble Essay\r'

'What type(s) of control- feedforward, concurrent, or feedback- do you think would leave been most useful in this situation? apologise your choice(s) Feedforward control would take hold been a good slit in this situation. It would fox been wise to check altogether of the gages on the mail before heading bring out onto the water. later on checking once it would non appall to mental image check in case something was over face uped. Since the business organisation is already dangerous, there should wealthy person been action interpreted to check the things that could create some(prenominal) bad situations. Instead, these things were not checked and lives were lost, the economy and the environment were affected by this ordeal. When signs of the fusss started showing up, there should rent been action taken to get everyone false the institutionalise safely and quickly.\r\n concurrent control would be the next thing that should choose happened. Since the ship was so la rge and going to do much(prenominal) as big line of credit, somebody should slang been assigned to watch the gages cargonfully and check either of the little things that make the ship run. Maybe if the problems would assume been addressed in a timely manner, the hazard could pee-pee been prevented or not as tragic. After it was all said and done is where feedback control step in to place. By taking notes of the signs, what happened and possible shipway to prevent it in the prox would have been important information. These kinds of documents could help others in the future and be a lesson to BP to have an inspection before leaving the dock. victimization exhibit 10-2 explain what BP could have done better.\r\nBy measuring the actual performance there could have been a test run of the ship on the course to its destination. Upon taking off, there could have been littler ships that followed alongside to make sure there was base hit if the ship had any problems. In doing so, the operator of the ship could have learned about the glitches beforehand which may have prevented the explosion. By doing a practice run, they capability have been able to see the problems and put this detail job on halt until the errors were repai fierce. some other unwrap element would be making sure their CB radios worked and called the dependable location.\r\n at a time the practice run was in progress, the conduct conductor could have assigned jobs to the other employees. These jobs could have included checking the bottom deck, watching gages, and watching for any potential threats in the water. Each employee could have modify out a report to show what they inspected and what the resultant role was of the inspection. If a section did not pass the inspection, the manager would have knowledge of what implyed financial aid. Then the ship could have been prep atomic number 18d to go on their journey.\r\nOnce the manager gave out the instructions on what to wee and assi gned heap to those jobs, another inspection could have taken place. This inspection would be to re-check the problem areas for straightlaced fixions. Then, if all of the parts passed inspection, they would know the ship is in top condition to set sail on their trip. Schedules could have been made out for reliable people to check on the areas that had problems. By assigning certain individuals, it could have helped keep better track of complications. wherefore do you think friendship employees ignored the red flags? How could such behavior be changed in the future?\r\nI think there are some(prenominal) ways the red flags may have been overlooked. matchless possible way would be poor job education. If you aren’t trained to know what something is supposed to look like or how it is supposed to work wherefore you wouldn’t know what a problem is you byword one. It seems more and more employees have little training when being hired on to a job. That, or they just do not pay attention to what their trainer tells them. By not knowing the comme il faut ways to do things could lead to more on the job accidents, like what happened with the BP ship. Another reason that it could have been overlooked is laziness. While the report says the problem went neglected until after the fact, doesn’t necessarily mean that someone did not see the problem and think it wasn’t a big enough problem to hurt anything. I think this kind of practice is decent more common which is a scary thought.\r\nthither are several ways to prevent such behavior in the future. The way the employees interact when they are trained is most likely a coup doeil into their work ethic. It is not wise to show them shortcuts or easier ways to do things in case they are on the job and need to know the correct way of doing the job. If they were to be taught an easier way and a problem arose it could cause an even bigger problem or possibly an injury. It could also leave them clueless as to what to do when they are on their own in the job. Another idea, would be to have regular meetings on the ship that are mandatory for all staff to attend. In these meetings the management team could address the rules, what is judge of the other employees, and where the ship is headed. What could other organizations learn from BP’s drop aways?\r\nA few things that other organizations could learn from this mistake is to always check for red flags. When you check your work, you have less of a run a risk of something going wrong. Another thing would be communication. colloquy is always important, precisely even more so in business. When employees authorise with one another they stay better assured and sometimes learn more about their jobs from others. Communication also helps employees to know what their job is and in what areas need progress.\r\nBy enforcing strict rules, it would help companies to keep their employees more focused on their jobs which will help the company be more successful. When a company sticks by the enforced rules, there is less of a chance of employees thinking they are able to slack off or take advantage of their positions due to concern of consequences. I think when managers pick favorites they allow them to persuade or even break the rules. I turn over that all managers should treat all employees equally and not cut slack to certain people. When this happens, it causes other employees to be hostile towards those employees and the managers that do it, which makes a lot of them not want to do as good of a job.\r\n'