oil and gas management Custom Essay

Coursework Assignment Brief

Semester: C15
Module Code: POG210
Module Title: Oil & Gas Management
Programme BSc (Hons) Oil & Gas Management
Level: Level 5
Awarding Body:
Module Leader
Format: Essay
Presentation: No
Any special requirements: • All work should be submitted on the Student Portal along with a Turnitin Report
Word Limit: 2,000 words (with 10% plus or minus leeway)
Deadline date for
submission:

Page 1 of 5

Learning outcomes to be examined in this assessment • Demonstrate an understanding of the interrelationship of the factors affecting management performance in different sectors of the worldwide oil and gas industry
• Discuss the financial, commercial and contractual activities used in the management worldwide oil and gas industry
Percentage of marks
awarded for module: This assignment is worth 50% of the total marks for the module
Assessment criteria Explanatory comments on the
assessment criteria Maximum marks for
each section
Content, style,
relevance, originality Clear demonstration of rigorous research
from recognised authoritative sources. Audience focus. Meeting the deliverables. 50%
Format, referencing,
bibliography Rigorous use of the Harvard Methodology for
citation and referencing; page numbering;
correct display of direct quotations. 10 %
Constructive critical
analysis, introduction, conclusion Demonstration of a clear understanding of
the issues. Use of academic models. Full articulation of ideas developed. Offering well-argued solutions and/or alternatives. 40%

page 2 of 5
Assignment Task

Can Britain retain ownership of its former imperial oil company – BP?

BP was a member of the “Seven Sisters” collective of international oil companies in the 1970s, rubbing shoulders with Exxon and Shell as one of the top 3 oil giants of that era. Since then, it has encountered several troubles, not least of which was its involvement with the Texas City refinery fire and the Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010.

The cost of the Gulf of Mexico debacle, at $43 billion and still counting, in fines, legal costs and clean-up has seen enter into asset sales of some $40 billion to help finance these gigantic bills.

Whilst doggedly maintaining its generous shareholder dividends, on which many private and institutional portfolios rely on both sides of the Atlantic, BP shares have fallen by one-fifth in the past 10 years. This contrasts significantly with broader stock market indices which show growth of some 20% in the same period.

Shareholders have become nervous, not only because the dividend returns are slightly negative, even if the yield remains good and attractive, but that BP is rapidly becoming a potential take-over target.

Stock market capitalization is still large at $107 billion, but in April 2010 BP’s market capitalization was at a high of $190 billion.

BP still has some strengths – its expertise in deep-water drilling and a 20% stake in
Rosneft, Russia’s biggest oil company.

More recent reactions by BP senior management to falling oil prices and the on- going USA lawsuits have seen a 15% reduction in capital expenditure this year, and the announcement of a $1 billion restructuring programme.

Is all this enough to keep BP independent, or will rivals seek to capitalize on BP’s weakness and make a take-over bid for it?

In a 2,000-word essay, discuss both the attractions and disadvantages of BP as a possible take-over target, and identify the most probable bidders for BP. Give some examples of the problems that face these potential bidders in terms of political issues and managerial styles. Discuss whether a continuation of low oil prices, as seen in the first quarter of 2015, will accelerate any take-over bid, or would low prices be another barrier.

Your own interpretations and conclusions from your researches are fundamental. Supporting your own arguments in a robust and objective manner will qualify for better marks than a simple re-statement of the data and opinion found in the research.

Total marks for assignment: 100

Page 3 of 5
Generic Criteria for Assessment at Level 5

Marks 0-25 (Fail) 26-39 (Fail) 40-49 (3rd) 50-59 (2.2) 60-69 (2.1) 70-85 (1st) 86-100 (1st)
Assessment categories

Knowledge & Understanding of Subject Major gaps in knowledge and understanding of material at this level.
Significant inaccuracies. Gaps in knowledge and only superficial understanding of
the well-established principles of area(s) of study.
Some inaccuracies. Threshold level.
Some knowledge and understanding of material, of well- established principles of area(s) of study, and of the way in which those principles have
been developed. Broad knowledge and understanding of material, of well- established principles of area(s) of study, and of the way in which those principles have
been developed. Very good knowledge and understanding of material, of well- established principles of area(s) of study, and of the way in which those principles have been
developed. Very good, detailed knowledge and understanding of material, main concepts/theories at this level. Awareness of the limitation of their knowledge, and how this influences any analyses and interpretations based on that knowledge. Exceptional knowledge and understanding of material, main concepts/theories at this level. Awareness
of the limitation of their knowledge, and how this influences any analyses and interpretations based on that knowledge
Cognitive/
Intellectual Skills

(e.g. analysis and synthesis; logic and argument; analytical reflection; organisation and communication of ideas and evidence) Unsubstantiated generalizations,
made without use
of any credible evidence. Lack of
logic, leading to unsupportable conclusions or missing
conclusions. Lack of analysis and relevance. Views/ findings largely irrelevant,
illogical or
contradictory. Generalisations/ statements made with scant evidence. Conclusions lack relevance and/or validity. Threshold level.
Awareness of main issues. Structure of argument effective, but with some gaps or weaknesses. Some evidence provided to support findings, but not always consistent. Some relevant conclusions. Issues identified and critically
analysed within
given areas. An awareness of
different stances and ability to use evidence to support argument. Ability to
apply concepts and principles outside context of study context. Generally
sound conclusions. Good level of analysis and synthesis. An awareness of
different stances and
ability to use
evidence convincingly to support argument. Ability to apply concepts/ principles
effectively beyond context of study. Valid conclusions. Excellent analysis and synthesis. A range of
perceptive points
made within given area for this level of study. Arguments logically developed, supported by a range of relevant evidence. Explicit acknowledgement of other stances.
Strong conclusions. Exceptional analysis and synthesis are
consistent features.
Perceptive, logically connected points made throughout the work within an eloquent, balanced argument. Evidence selected judiciously and thoroughly analysed. Persuasive
conclusions.

Use of Research- informed Literature (including referencing,
appropriate academic
conventions and academic honesty) No evidence of reading. Views
are unsupported and non- authoritative. Academic
conventions largely ignored. Evidence of little reading appropriate
for this level and/or indiscriminate use of sources. Academic
conventions used weakly. Threshold level.
Evidence of reading relevant sources, with some appropriate linking to given text(s). Academic conventions
evident and largely consistent, with minor weaknesses. Knowledge and analysis of a range
of literature beyond core text(s). Literature used accurately and
analytically. Academic skills generally sound. Knowledge of the
field of literature used consistently to
support findings.
Research-informed literature integrated into the work. Very good use of academic conventions. Critical engagement with a range of
reading. Knowledge of research-informed literature embedded in the work.
Consistently accurate use of academic conventions. Exceptionally wide range of relevant
literature evaluated and used critically to inform argument, balance discussion and/or
inform problem-solving. Consistently accurate and assured use of academic conventions.

Page 4 of 5

LEVEL 5 cont…

Graduate Skills for Life and Employment

(e.g. research- related skills; written, graphical and oral communication skills;
group working; problem-solving; practical and professional skills) Little or no
evidence of the required skills in any of the areas identified for assessment at this level. Limited evidence of
skills in the range identified for assessment at this level. Significant weaknesses evident, which suggest that the candidate is not yet on course to gain skills necessary for graduate-level employment. Research skills:
Some evidence of ability to collect and interpret
appropriate data/ information and undertake research tasks with limited
external guidance. Can communicate
in a range of formats, including orally, appropriate to the discipline(s), but with some weaknesses.
Can work with others as a
member of a group, meeting most obligations to others, modifying responses appropriately.
Can identify key areas of problems and generally choose appropriate methods for their resolution.
Able to recognise
own strengths and weaknesses in relation to professional and practical skills, but with limited insight in some areas.
. Research skills:
Can undertake research-like tasks, drawing on a range of sources, with limited external guidance.
Can communicate
effectively and confidently in a range of formats, including orally, appropriate to the discipline(s).
Can work
effectively with others as a member of a group, meeting obligations to others, modifying responses appropriately.
Can identify key areas of problems
and choose appropriate methods for their resolution in a considered manner.
Able to evaluate
own strengths and weaknesses
in relation to professional and practical skills, and to develop own evaluation criteria. Research skills:
Can successfully complete research- like tasks, drawing on a range of sources, with limited external guidance.
Can communicate
well, confidently and consistently in a range of formats, including orally, appropriate to the discipline(s).
Can work very
effectively and confidently with others as a member of a group, meeting obligations to others, modifying responses appropriately.
Can identify key areas of problems and choose, with autonomy, appropriate methods for their resolution in
a considered manner. Able to take initiative in evaluating own strengths and weaknesses in
relation to professional and practical skills identified by others and develop and effectively apply own evaluation criteria. Research skills:
Can successfully complete research- like tasks, drawing on a range of sources, with a significant degree of autonomy. Can communicate very effectively and confidently in a range of formats, including orally, appropriate to the discipline(s).
Can work very effectively and
confidently with others as a member
of a group, showing leadership skills where appropriate, and meet all obligations to others. Can identify key areas of problems confidently and choose, with autonomy and
notable effectiveness, appropriate methods for their resolution in
a considered manner. Able to show insight and autonomy in evaluating own strengths and weaknesses re professional and practical skills, showing excellent judgement. Research skills:
Evidence of exceptional success in undertaking
a range of research-like tasks with high degree
of autonomy for the level. Can communicate highly
effectively, with professionalism, in a range of formats, including orally, appropriate to the discipline(s).
Can work
exceptionally well with others as a key
member of a group, showing leadership skills where appropriate, negotiating and meeting all obligations to others.
Can identify key areas of problems confidently and
choose, with autonomy and exceptional effectiveness, appropriate methods
for their resolution in a considered manner.
Able to show insight and autonomy in evaluating own strengths and weaknesses, showing
outstanding judgement.
Marks for Level 5 0-25 (Fail) 26-39 (Fail) 40-49 (3rd) 50-59 (2.2) 60-69 (2.1) 70-85 (1st) 86-100 (1st)

Page 5 of 5