Training And Development In Baker Hughes Leadership ✓ Solved

Training And Development In Baker Hughes Leadershipdate 21052020ta

The overall aim of this report is to assist Baker Hughes and its leaders, in becoming complexity thinkers to reduce the frequency of issues and increase employee safety. The short-term objective is to reduce incidents and give some suggestions to help BH adjust and improve company culture for the long-term development. The report analyzes the main problems of BH, supported by background briefings and industry insights, and proposes a phased training plan to enhance leadership's complexity thinking skills, safety awareness, and continuous improvement abilities.

The training program is divided into three stages: understanding self-organization concepts through videos and slides; practicing systems thinking via games and discussions using Michael Goodman and Richard Karash's six steps; and evaluation through tests and group presentations on operational issues. The approach emphasizes applying complexity thinking, particularly self-organization and system dynamics, in real work scenarios to enhance decision-making and safety protocols.

Sample Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

Baker Hughes (BH), as a leading energy technology company supporting drilling activities and manufacturing oil and gas equipment, faces critical safety and operational problems rooted in complex systems and human factors. The company's safety issues are often linked to oversights by leadership regarding hazards, necessitating a shift toward complexity thinking—an approach that recognizes the unpredictable, adaptive, and interconnected nature of operational environments (Martin, 2007). To address these concerns, a comprehensive training program aimed at cultivating complexity thinkers among BH's leaders is essential. This program leverages systems thinking, self-organization principles, and practical exercises to foster a proactive safety culture and enhance decision-making capabilities.

Understanding Complexity Thinking and Self-Organization

Complexity thinking involves examining systems where multiple agents interact in unpredictable ways, leading to emergent patterns and behaviors (Hager & Beckett, 2019). Such systems are characterized by nonlinear relationships, adaptation, and self-organization, processes where order arises spontaneously from local interactions without external control (Braakman, 2017). For BH, understanding these principles enables leaders to better anticipate hazards, recognize patterns that indicate risks, and foster environments where safety is emergent rather than imposed.

Self-organization plays a vital role in complex systems by allowing entities within a system—such as human operators—to organize themselves effectively without external directives. Examples include molecular assemblies, animal herds, and organizational networks. In energy industries, self-organization manifests in teams dynamically adjusting to operational challenges, leading to safer and more resilient systems (Halatek et al., 2018). Training leaders to recognize and facilitate self-organizing processes enhances their perceptiveness and responsiveness, reducing safety incidents caused by hierarchical rigidity or miscommunication.

Applying Systems Thinking in Leadership Development

To operationalize complexity thinking, the training adopts Michael Goodman and Richard Karash’s six steps of systems thinking: telling the story, drawing behavior over time graphs, creating focusing statements, identifying system structure, exploring issues more deeply, and planning interventions (The Systems Thinker, 2020). These steps guide leaders from understanding their operational environment to designing structural changes that promote safety and efficiency.

For instance, engaging leaders in story-telling sessions enables them to share diverse perspectives on safety incidents. Drawing behavior over time helps identify trends and recurring problems. Creating focusing statements clarifies objectives, while analyzing system structures reveals root causes of hazards. Going deeper involves exploring hidden feedback loops or nonlinear effects, and planning interventions involves designing structural changes—such as modifying communication channels or safety protocols—that induce desired behaviors.

Practical Implementation: Games and Discussions

The training employs interactive games based on causality maps and BOT graphs to reinforce systems thinking skills (Carnegie Mellon University). Participants collaborate to construct relationship maps under changing conditions, simulating real-time operational challenges. These exercises promote high-level communication, adaptability, and understanding of dynamic interactions—the hallmarks of complexity thinking (Jager, 2020).

The first round focuses on mapping relationships and pattern recognition, while feedback discussions guide participants through the remaining steps of system analysis. Subsequent rounds increase difficulty, encouraging leaders to adjust strategies based on emergent knowledge, thus fostering experiential learning of self-organization principles and systemic causality.

Evaluation and Continuous Learning

The program concludes with assessments—tests, group presentations, or online exams—to evaluate understanding of key concepts like self-organization and systemic structures. Continuous learning is emphasized through follow-up sessions every three months via videos, readings, or assessments, ensuring sustained development of complexity thinking skills (Colman, 2019). Leveraging online interfaces for progress tracking enables personalized learning paths, supporting BH leaders' ongoing professional growth in safety and operational excellence.

Conclusion

By fostering complexity thinking, self-organization, and systemic analysis, BH can significantly improve safety outcomes, operational resilience, and organizational culture. The proposed training strategically combines theoretical knowledge, practical exercises, and ongoing evaluation to equip leaders with the tools needed for proactive hazard identification and effective decision-making. Such a transformation aligns with industry demands for resilient systems and continuous improvement, ultimately enhancing BH’s competitive advantage.

References

• Braakman, R., Follows, M. J., & Chisholm, S. W. (2017). Metabolic evolution and the self-organization of ecosystems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(15), E3091-E3100.
• Colman, H. (2019). 6 Adult Learning Theories and How to Put Them into Practice. ISpringsolutions.com
• Hager, P., & Beckett, D. (2019). Complex Systems and Complexity Thinking. In The Emergence of Complexity. Springer.
• Halatek, J., Brauns, F., & Frey, E. (2018). Self-organization principles of intracellular pattern formation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.
• Jager, T. (2020). The Importance of Self-Organization. Everyday Power
• Martin, R., & Sunley, P. (2007). Complexity thinking and evolutionary economic geography. Journal of Economic Geography.
• The Systems Thinker. (2020). Six Steps to Thinking Systemically. Available online
• Thinking.net. (2020). The Six Systems Thinking Steps. Available online
• Appliedsystemsthinking.com. (2020). Practical Systems Thinking Applications. Available online
• Ticoll, D. (2004). Get Self-Organized. Harvard Business Review.