System Thinking Tools and Techniques for Project Managers: Texas City and Deepwater Horizon

Running head: SYSTEM THINKING
System thinking
(Texas City and Deepwater Horizon)
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author Note

1SYSTEM THINKING
“System thinking tools and techniques for project managers to solve project
problems: Texas City and Deepwater Horizon”
The system thinking has been a holistic approach focusing on the way that the constituent
parts of a system have been interrelating. This has been also useful to determine how activities over
time and under the context of wider systems have been working. However, it has been contrasting
with conventional analysis. This has been studying systems through breaking down into distinct
systems. The process can be utilized in any sector of research (Yin, Hayworth & Clement, 2015).The
system thinking states that the behavior of system has been resulting from the impacts of balancing
and reinforcing processes. The reinforcing methods have been the leading to rise of system
component. (Bacosa et al., 2016). In the following essay various system thinking tools are analyzed
along with techniques that have been aiding project managers to resolve issues. Here the instances of
project on Texas City and Deep-water Horizon are considered. Besides, National Commission on the
BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling is chosen as the case study. It has included
the general systems management, organizational forms and cultures (Zengel et al., 2016).
Engineering risks and risk management, portfolio management, business values and portfolio
management process cycle and the organizational maturity.
Here attention feedback is vital element of system thinking. Here, for instance the prevailing
knowledge in project management has been prescribing the incorporation of workers to the project
that has been lagging. Besides, in practice, the tactics has been actually showing development at the
past. Moreover, attention to relevant feedback has been allowing management to look for various
solutions instead of wasting the resources on the approach that it has been shown to be
counterproductive. The system thinking has been using computer simulations and various graphs and
diagrams for modeling, illustrating and predicting the behavior of system. For example, within the

2SYSTEM THINKING
effective system tools, the BOT or “Behavior Over Time” graph has been indicating the actions of
one or more variable around a certain time period. The CLD or Casual Loop Diagram has been
illustrating relationships between various system elements (Williams, Bacosa & Quigg, 2017). The
“management flight simulator” has been using the interactive program for simulating impacts of
management decisions. Moreover, the simulation model has been simulating interaction of system,
elements at time.
The general system management has lying on the basis of unification of management
science. Here the open system models have been stimulated through various conceptualizations
within management practice and organization theory (Wood et al., 2015). Besides, the experience to
use those concepts has been suggesting various unresolved dilemmas. Different contingency views
have been representing steps towards less abstractions and more explicit relationship patterns and
much applicable theory.
Moreover, sophistication has been coming as the business shave more better unders5tanding
of organizations as an overall system. In other works of denotes the configurations of subsystems. At
last the organization theory has been serving as the foundation of more efficient practice of
management. The business can be tempted to organize small business as per traditional hierarchical
structure (Roberts, Flin & Cleland, 2015).
The organizations are been established for meeting the needs. Here, for instance the services
and goods are provided. They have been taking various forms. All these have been influenced
through various factors like purpose, size and complexity of tasks it has been performing, external
environment and culture. The products, services and its location have been determining the structure
to best. Here, the chosen structure has been governing the way where the organizations has been
operating and have possessed positive and negative effects (Kanso & Nelson, 2017).

3SYSTEM THINKING
As per the Organizational structures, forms and culture of “National Commission on the BP
Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling” is considered, there has been inadequacies and
weaknesses of federal regulation and oversight. There have been concerns to look at the
effectiveness of the reactions to spill. Moreover, there have been remarkable examples of people
involved in cleanup and rescue. However because of hard work, the worst-case scenarios has been
not been coming to pass (Powers et al., 2017). However it has impossible to debate that the industry
has been prepared for disasters happening because of the high amount of Deepwater Horizon oil
spill.
As a business, BP has been undergoing through various changes for a shorter period of time.
They have moving from state owned to private company having a bureaucratic structure. This has
been characterized by long hierarchies and various narrow control spans. Restructuring and
downsizing has been taking place as the measure to mitigate problems (Vander Zanden et al., 2016).
As any decentralization occurs it has been helpful to quicken decision-making and spreading the
workload. This has been allowing top-level managers to focus on various strategic planning. Here,
the employees have been encouraging to undertake responsibilities and take decisions for the
outcomes. Apart from this empowering of mangers at the lower level has been emphasizing over
trusts and rising the motivation.
The complete incident has been coming down to the way of BP and various others have been
managing project risks. Here, the contexts have been higher than the risk management. This has been
helpful to tell the number of various other headers in the document. However, as it comes down to
project risk management, the “greenthink” or system think risks have been evaluated differently. As
the environmental factors are considered, that have been never been applied, the BP has been
recognized with risks to blowout the extremely low probability of occurrences. This has been based