There is always change taking place within the society and in every organization or firm in business. Dexter Dunphy (2011) calls this “a perfect storm of change” (p.6), which is said to be a “global situation of unprecedented urgency” (p.4). This becomes a crisis to the society, not unless the firm acts on its impulse, to take effective action that would successfully solve the issue being confronted. This leads to actions of sustainability for sustainability. It is these sustainable models and framework that will answer to the call of the changing environment, to prevent crisis from taking place in societies within the globe.
According to Dunphy (2011), sustainability refers to actions that aim in extending the “social useful life of organizations” (p.9), while enhancing the capacity of the society to solve problems and maintain itself. Dunphy (2011) described this as maintaining “a decent level of welfare, participation and personal freedom for present and future generations of humanity” (p.9). To do this, there is a need to apply a particular framework called Four Ways of Thinking, for sustainability to take place within the organization, in spite of the change.
The case of Royal Dutch Shell
It was in 2005 when Royal Dutch Shell—the fourth largest company in the globe—purchased a drill rig called the Kulluk, which rose to 250 feet above waterline, with an anchor system to lock it in place (Funk, 2014, p.1). Kulluk was anchored to the Arctic Ocean seabed, in a particular oil deposit, where they are to take certain core samples to test if there are significant oil underneath the seabed. According to Funk (2014), “If it found significant oil, its test wells would be replaced by a production well, the Kulluk by a permanent platform that would sit in place for decades” (p.4). Before winter set in, they executed their plan of sinking a partial well down the seabed, and then capping it just above the oil zone, and then leaving the top hole primed for completion. By December however, the Gulf of Alaska was one of the stormiest spot in the globe, and there were hurricane-force winds, so that it became impossible to upgrade the Kulluk and too expansive for Dutch Harbor. More so, the storm sent saltwater flooding into the tug in its back deck, which stormed into fuel vents and the interior spaces, and it damaged the cranes, the electronics, and the heating systems. The crew was left in the middle of a storm, while trying to find a way to prepare an emergency towline.
Applying the four ways of thinking
Systems thinking
Currently, the case of Royal Dutch Shell goes beyond the firm’s borders, and extends to that of the society and the global society, due to a number of incidents. First, the fulfillment of the project led the lives of the crew to the edge, since there was a storm, and hurricane-force winds were putting their lives at risk. Second, the case extends to the system of environment, as it was found out that there were “multiple unreported engine failures and makeshift hose-and-barrel system for bilge water that discharged oily waste into the ocean” (Funk, 2014, p.7). Third, the case extends to the system of economy, since there were cases when it could have led to additional oil-facilities tax if the Kulluk stays in Alaska until the January first (Funk, 2014, p.8). Fourth, it extends to the system of the future humanity, since there happens to have fast, continuous depletion of oil, which is very important in maintaining electricity in future generations. Fifth and final, the case extends to human rights, since the crew had the right to save their lives in the storm, in spite of their duties and the need to concentrate on the oil drill of the company they worked for. The article, however, focuses more on the system of investment, as was the center theme of the article.
Values thinking
When it comes to values thinking, the case of Royal Dutch Shell presents the principle that, money only comes after the lives of humanity, and that there is social integrity when there exists sustainability. As Dunphy (2011) mentioned, sustainability enhances “the planet’s ability to maintain and renew the viability of the biosphere and protect all living species” (p.9). This is seen in the said case, wherein Royal Dutch Shell focused on the goal of including the overall state of the environment, and not just the success of their investment. There was justice when the firm focused on the goal of saving the lives of their crew members. There was social-ecological integrity when they intended to keep their project ecologically friendly, although they were not able to prevent them from discharging oil wastes into the ocean. In terms of ethics, the case presented the need to save lives and keep the environment clean and safe, instead of focusing solely on the success of the firm’s investment. In the complexity of the problem, the company succeeded in maintaining its state of sustainability by focusing more on the significance of the principles and values.
Futures thinking
In terms of future thinking, it is evident that Royal Dutch Shell should have taken the fact that the investment may not be suitable to be done on the latter part of the year, when it would be winter, and there were heavy storms prevented the crew from achieving their goal. The actual case may not be as simple as that of the plan, and they should have estimated that there would be problems in executing the plan. Also, they failed to execute future thinking when they failed to prepare a dome and barge that were important for their investment to be executed. There was “faulty electrical connection” (Funk, 2014, p.5), which caused them to shoot the surface, even without warning. They also had a problem when the exhaust system emitted loud blast, extinguishing small blaze right after, which was seen and felt hundreds of yards from the port. This is different from the incident when the propeller shaft vibrated so strongly that the crew shut off the engines, as an effect of the 16 violations within the port (Funk, 2014, p.7). All these were all proofs that the crew system had failed in terms of future thinking, and it affected the propulsion and safety of the unit, which compromised their lives.
Strategic thinking
In spite of Royal Dutch Shell’s failures in future thinking, it was able to organize an effective strategy when the crew was already doing their work in Alaska. They were able to form an effective strategy after the containment dome was crushed before the winter season, and they planned in sinking a partial well just above the oil zone. However, they failed in preparing an effective strategy to make sure that the crew would remain safe and that their lives would not be in jeopardy. They focused more on the issue of keeping humanity and the environment safe, but have failed in keeping the lives of their crew safe as well. Still, they were able to execute a good strategy when the unified command notified that lives were at risk, and that they should evacuate 18 men stuck in the Kulluk (Funk, 2014, p.12). They thought about lowering a basket to the crew, and then hoist them up to the helicopter. It was one of the most sustainable, humane strategy that they had come up with, as they proved the lives of the 18 crew members to be more substantial than that of the investment.
Conclusion
The four ways of thinking presents a step-by-step formula in presenting whether the case reflects thinking and planning in a sustainable manner. There is a need for integration when planning and executing sustainability, as each component is essential in responding meaningfully to different issues within a variety of systems. However, sustainability is more than just the critical thinking skills, as it corresponds with the planning and execution of a strategy that would suffice in creating a socially useful life within the planet. If this is the case, then the Royal Dutch Shell had more or less succeeded in executing a strategy that focused on increasing their state of sustainability. They only had to focus more on future thinking, to prevent future problems from taking place. By embarking more on sustainability, they will have participated in saving the present and future generations of humanity, to gain social and ecological integrity for a safer, more humane world in the future.
References:
Dunphy, D. (2011). “Chapter 1: Conceptualizing sustainability: the business opportunity.” In G. Eweje & M. Perry’s, Business & sustainability: concepts, strategies and changes (pp.3-24). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Funk, M. (2014, December 30). “The wreck of the Kulluck.” The New York Times Magazine. Retrieved June 19, 2015, from http://nyti.ms/1A7UJb3.
Warren, A., Archambault, L., & Foley, R. (2015). Sustainability education framework for teachers: Developing sustainability literacy through futures, values, systems, and strategic thinking. The Journal of Sustainability Education. Retrieved June 20, 2015, from http://www.jsedimensions.org/wordpress/content/sustainability-education-framework-for-teachers-developing-sustainability-literacy-through-futures-values-systems-and-strategic-thinking_2015_01/.
