How BPX Implemented Dual-Career Ladders

Abstract

OVERVIEW: When BP Exploration decided to transform its structure and culture, a key item on the company's agenda was to set up a dual career ladder system in which individual contributors, such as technologists and R&D specialists, could advance as far as managers. The design methodology, the author explains, turned out to be as important as the resulting ladders themselves. Every type of employee-worldwide--participated in the process, which reconceived not only technical roles but managerial roles as well. The multilevel design teams abandoned the old concept of job descriptions and discovered new ways to ensure that the scientific/technical and management ladders stayed parallel all the way to the top. They also modeled the teamwork, open inking, and personal responsibility that BPX is encouraging as it tries become more flexible and innovative. In the current climate of economic uncertainty, the dual-career ladder--one path for would-be managers and another for individual professional contributors who prefer not to go into management--is attracting renewed interest. Management jobs are disappearing as companies downsize, and competitive success depends increasingly on technological innovation. Therefore, it makes no sense to insist that management can be the only route to the higher levels of the organization. Why not, instead, encourage technical and R&D stars to increase their contributions, and measure their success, by doing what they do best? Recently, BP Exploration, the arm of the multinational giant British Petroleum that finds and develops oil and gas reserves, conducted a complete overhaul of its career path system. This process, in which I was involved as a consultant, was part of a massive restructuring and cultural change effort designed to make BPX more flexible and innovative. In fact, the design of a dual-ladder system became a key ingredient in the transformation, exemplifying profound changes in the way the company conceived of success, jobs and employee empowerment. TRAPS TO AVOID Having done its homework, BPX was aware that, although dual-ladder systems have been around for more than two decades, many have proved disappointing. Even some that were initially welcomed, by individual contributors and managers alike, have not been able to keep up with the evolving needs of the organization. The reasons for such pallid performance include, depending on the company: * Lack of commitment from senior executives, managers and even individual contributors who could not see the value to them of a dual-ladder system. * Difficulty in making the individual-contributor ladder truly parallel to the management ladder--all the way to the top--in terms of responsibility, reward and influence. * Using the individual-contributor or technical ladder as a repository for unsuccessful managers. * Inflexibility: No way to transfer from one career path to the other as the individual's accomplishments, qualifications, aspirations, and the company's needs evolve. THE DESIGN CONCEPT In designing its dual-ladder system, BPX set out to avoid these traps. Because of the new culture BPX was seeking to create--emphasizing networking and employee empowerment rather than hierarchy, and openness and creative dissonance rather than control--the process was as important as the product. BPX was not venturing into entirely virgin territory. The career path concept it pursued had been pioneered by two northern California companies, National Semiconductor and Network Equipment Technologies. Although BPX took the concept further, several important characteristics distinguished the design process of all three companies from that of many others. First, the new system was not imposed from the top or engineered by a separate management or human resources committee. Employees from all categories that would be affected by the new career ladders--individual contributors, managers, human resource people, and senior executives--participated directly in the design. …