I have been resisting the urge to write about the myriad of continuity related issues and mistakes coming out of the gulf oil spill. However, recent articles and interviews about BP's contingency plan for an event at Deepwater Horizon raise an interesting question.
Taking a quick step back, it seems that on an almost daily basis there is yet another communication blunder or operational disconnect that overshadows any progress BP may be making. The accumulation of false starts, failed attempts, and changes to communication strategies only reinforce the idea that, to a large extent, BP is making things up as they go along - both technically and from a PR perspective. The interesting part is that they have a plan - spanning hundreds of pages (I'll tackle the issue of quantity vs quality another time) - that was supposedly designed to address this type of worst case scenario.
The question is, is it better to have an imperfect (and in this case a woefully imperfect) plan rather than none at all? And if so, how do you set the bar for "close enough"? This has implications from both an operational perspective - time, manpower, cost etc. - and, more importantly, from an ethical perspective - for BC professionals.