Royal Dutchs Shell Dynamics Essay

1138 Words5 Pages
Royal Dutchs Shell Dynamics Royal Dutch Shell (RDS) is the sixth largest company on the planet. It is made up of 1700 smaller companies and employs 101,000 people throughout the world. This is not a nimble start-up company that is attempting to create a brand new culture; this is a behemoth of a company, with over 100 years of history and a workforce that is literally global. The business in which RDS operates is primarily oil and natural gas, commodities that can fluctuate dramatically in market value by the minute. Systems thinkers in the 1970’s at Royal Dutch began to plan for many future scenarios, including a future where a barrel of oil would cost $15 (this, at a time when the value of a barrel of oil was $30 a barrel).…show more content…
66) To become an organization that would survive another 100 years, RDS and its subsidiaries had to re-examine their culture. The leaders of the company, middle management, and the employees needed to start viewing mistakes as opportunities to increase learning. This is an integral part of the learning organization. The person or persons making the mistake should own it so it is not repeated, but not be persecuted for making them. Mistakes can illuminate a flaw in any system, and the opportunity to improve should not be missed. The manager becomes more of a learner and a teacher. The idea that a leader is the person with all the answers needed to be thrown out the window. In today’s rapidly changing environment, there is no such person. Without the ability to embrace mistakes, any company will perish. Royal Dutch Shell and SOC also needed to be able to continuously rework its systems and structures. This was a huge transformation considering the sheer size of the organization. The same old way would simply not continue to work. Steve Miller, managing director for RDS, spoke about their presence in French retail market. “We were in the red and losing market share. The advent of hypermarkets had changed the game, and we weren’t responding effectively to this new competitive threat….we either had to find a way to become profitable and grow, or we had to exit – because the way we were going, we couldn’t stay in the game much longer.”
Open Document