case virtual team work at BP
Knowing the Drill:Virtual Teamwork at BP
On a cold day on the North Sea in 1995, a group of BP
Exploration drilling engineers had a problem.
Equipment failure had brought operations to a halt—
and because they couldn’t diagnose the trouble, they
faced the prospect of taking the mobile drilling ship
(leased at a cost of $150,000 a day) back to port indefinitely.
Instead, they hauled the faulty hardware in
front of a tiny video camera connected to a newly
installed computer workstation. Using a satellite link,
they dialed up a BP drilling equipment expert in
Aberdeen. To him, the problem was apparent, and he
guided them quickly through the repair. The down
time, as it turned out, lasted only a few hours.
The equipment aboard the ship was there thanks to a
pilot project BP had just undertaken called “Virtual
Teamwork.” The name reflects the aim: to support
collaboration across the barriers of distance and
organizational structure, through the use of
sophisticated technology.
The project had grown out of BP Exploration’s
reorganization a year earlier into forty-two separate
business assets. Prior to that, exploration activities
had been carried out by a few closely controlled
regional operating centers. Believing that smaller,
more autonomous businesses could work more efficiently
and creatively, Managing Director John
Browne had overseen the transformation of the company
into “a federation of assets,” each with the freedom
to develop processes and solutions to serve its
own local needs. The assumption was that some local
initiatives would turn out to be applicable elsewhere
in the company. BP would benefit from the variety
and creative power of forty-two moderate-sized
companies sharing their experiences.1
Good communication was clearly essential to
making the federation work. In videoconferencing
technology, Browne and others saw potential for
fostering some of the creative synergy they
sought. Accordingly, management authorized an
eighteen-month, $13 million pilot project to test
the concept.
Designing the Pilot
Browne asked John Cross, then head of Information
Technology, to lay the groundwork. Cross’s first
decision was that the project should be undertaken
by an independent group formed for the purpose—
not “owned” by Information Technologies. He wanted
to emphasize that the objective was behavior and
work pattern change, not technology. It also made
sense, given the aim of transcending organizational
boundaries, that the project team be drawn from
diverse parts of the company. A core team of five was
appointed, most of whom had had experience in more
than one area. It was led by Kent Greenes, who
worked in Human Resources and had a background
in Operations.
The team began work in December 1994, specifying
hardware and software for the Virtual Teamwork
station (or “client”). The package included desktop
videoconferencing equipment, multimedia e-mail,
application sharing, shared chalkboards, tools to
record video clips, groupware, and a web browser.
A document scanner—a last-minute addition that
proved extremely useful—completed the setup.
Connections were made using ISDN lines and, where
necessary, satellite links.
For the pilot, the team decided to equip five different
communities with Virtual Teamwork clients, to provide
enough variety for a fair test. First, they chose
the Andrew Project group, which was completing a
new drilling platform for an emerging oil field.
The others included a mature oil field group; an
established network of experts who had already
been communicating with each other by e-mail,
newsletters, and occasional meetings; a new network
of geoscientists and engineers formed specifically for
the project; and what the team called the “business
center network.” This last consisted of five VT clients
placed in key BP offices around the world, each with
a full-time “host” whose job was to encourage its use
at that location.
After highly centralized BP Exploration was reorganized into a “federation of assets,”
new ways had to be found to enable knowledge-sharing across parts of the business. One
success has been videoconferencing. BP piloted the technology in five geographically
dispersed work communities, being careful to set clear business goals by which to measure
its value. The project team knew it was not true that “if you build it, they will come.”
People with much to gain from the new capability still required coaching to see how it could
enhance their work.
article abstract
Research Roundup, pg. 87
Innovation
in Action
16
An unplanned experiment helped prove them right.
Due to budget constraints, one of the projects—the
new network of geoscientists and engineers—was set
up without coaching. The members of what was called
the Virtual Petrotechnical Team were given VT equipment
and essentially left alone to find uses for it. This
project was the only one of the five that failed. The
problem was not that the group couldn’t make the
technology work—it was fairly simple to operate.
What they lacked was an understanding of why they
should bother. Remarks from the team (“I don’t see
how this fits in with my work.” “The people I want to
talk to are not on the network.”) were similar to those
made initially by other teams. In part because there
was no one to help the group explore the value of the
system and overcome their skepticism, their VT
network declined and eventually fell silent.
Proof of Concept
In the four other groups, once clients were put in
place, project directors were surprised at how quickly
virtual teamworking became an integral part of their
work. Teams began to experience the benefits of the
system within weeks—in some cases within days—and
enthusiasm and use increased.
The Andrew Project provides a good example of the
positive impact of virtual teamworking. The use of VT
technology was one of two innovations on the project.
The other was the decision to complete as much
of the platform as possible on shore before moving
construction to the offshore drilling site. There was
no link between the innovations, but together they
In establishing the goals of the project, the emphasis
was entirely on promoting the achievement of
business goals. Performance agreements were
co-developed by the core team and participants in
each of the five groups. Goals included increasing the
efficiency and effectiveness of decision-making,
reducing costs, adhering to schedules, and solving
problems creatively. Recognizing the importance of
measuring these results objectively, the core team
hired an independent consulting firm to perform the
task. The consultants helped generate the list of
expected benefits at the start and tracked actual
results as the pilot progressed.
The Importance of Coaching
A subgroup of the core team called the Change
Management Team was responsible for helping
participants understand both how to use the
technology and how it could further their work. This
effort was deliberately called “coaching” rather than
“training”: coaches work to get the best out of
players—they don’t simply present information to
passive recipients. Only twenty percent of the
coaches’ time was designated for training people
in how to use the system. The rest would consist
of challenging and helping them to exploit its
capabilities to serve their business needs. The core
team was so convinced that extensive coaching was
essential to the success of the project that they spent
approximately half the pilot’s budget on it.
seemed to create an enthusiasm for doing work in
new ways. Building the platform was a joint effort by
BP and two other companies: Brown & Root, a
Houston-based design and engineering firm with an
office in Wimbledon; and Trafalgar House, a Teesside
construction company. This project would test virtual
teamworking’s usefulness not only in connecting
employees over distance but also in linking separate
organizations. Initially, Trafalgar House expressed
doubt; they questioned whether the value of a faceto-
face meeting could really be provided by viewing
distant team members on a computer monitor.
Certainly, virtual teamworking did not eliminate the
need for meetings. Colleagues still needed them to
establish mutual trust and to hash out important
issues involving large groups. Meetings were,
however, significantly reduced. Having met once,
participants found that videoconferencing maintained
a richness of communication and a sense of direct
personal contact that phone calls, e-mail, or memos
could not match. Before long, even Trafalgar House
praised the system.
But the quantifiable benefits on the Andrew Project
went well beyond reductions in travel expenses and
time. There were also measurable productivity
improvements related to more efficient information
searches and issue resolution, and less “miscommunication.”
One finding was that commitments made
“face-to-face” using the VT stations were honored
much more consistently than commitments made by
phone or mail. (This underscores John Cross’s point,
that the project was principally about behavior, not
technology.) Time frames were also compressed by
things like the VT clients’ application-sharing feature,
which allowed teams to write memos jointly, avoiding
hours or days of sending drafts back and forth. In
sum, virtual teamworking contributed significantly to
the project’s meeting its target date and incurring a
much lower total cost of steadily bringing forward
first oil, a principal milestone in the development of a
new field.
Another unplanned use of the network allowed
teamwork to transcend not only distance but time.
Quarterly, Rodney Chase (head of BP Exploration)
holds a Performance Review where reports are
submitted by managers of all the firm’s assets. In
the past, the review was a mish-mash of live presentations
and, from those managers who could not
make the meeting, prose reports or bullet-point
slides. Four days before the December 1995 Quarterly
Performance Review, it occurred to one of Chase’s
assistants that VT might enrich the review. Working
through the Business Center Network hosts, the VT
team arranged for every asset manager to create a
video report. As well as increasing the review’s
quality, the effort extended its reach. All reports were
taped and subsequently published on CD-ROM, to
make them available to senior managers worldwide.
Next Steps
Based on the success of the pilot, plans were
approved to expand Virtual Teamworking by a significant
number of new clients in 1996. By the end of
1997, the team hopes the equipment will be available
to a high proportion of professional staff—providing
the “critical mass” needed to transform the company
into a far-flung but close-knit federation of business
units and workers.
They are currently developing online videocon-
Unexpected Uses
The VT team was even more encouraged by some
spontaneous and relatively unstructured uses of the
technology they observed. Although the immediate
benefits are less clear than the cost reductions and
productivity increases of the Andrew Project, these
explorations suggest that virtual teamworking is
developing a life of its own, and may have far-ranging
impact on the way work at BP Exploration is done.
For example, VT users began communicating across
projects, with members of the Andrew Project, for
instance, contacting members of the Miller Team. The
connection was important: much of the knowledge
the latter team had gained from a now-mature oil
field was highly applicable to work on the emerging
Andrew field. The collaboration inspired an imaginary
headline—”Scottish oil discovered in Alaska!”—coined
by the core team to proclaim VT’s ability to nullify
distance and transfer knowledge.
The “hosts” of the Business Center Network, meanwhile,
decided to hold weekly “virtual coffee breaks.”
The idea was to try to mimic a knowledge-sharing
opportunity that co-located employees enjoy every
day. Famously, “water cooler conversations” are how
people absorb corporate culture; they also bring
about chance conversations that sometimes spark
creative ideas. With no set agenda announced, these
virtual coffee breaks have attracted up to twenty
people at eight separate locations. Their expectation—
and the company’s—is that the conversations
will pay off in unpredictable ways.
Choosing Your Spots . . . , pg. 45
John Kao, pg. 73
Innovation
in Action
19
ferencing “yellow pages” to replace the pilot project’s
simple phonebook. Yellow page listings will include
photographs and short biographies noting individuals’
interests, not just their formal roles. The team also
hopes to integrate a knowledge base into the
system that will guide people with questions to
sources of expertise.
At the same time, BP established a knowledge management
task force, reporting to Director Russell Seal,
whose purpose is to identify and recommend new
opportunities and strategies for organizational learning
and knowledge sharing. The task force will evaluate
knowledge activities inside and outside the
company to determine which should be expanded or
introduced. Building on the objective of the Virtual
Teamworking project, the goal is to improve performance
by promoting behavioral changes that will
make continuous learning and knowledge-sharing the
company norm
