This audit was called upon after an incident related to BP that led to a fire that took the lives of 15 and harmed 150 people. With reference to the report, the BP was embroiled in cost cutting measures for years. This in turn predisposed the company to catastrophes of this nature. The management of the BP group was the major actor, and the workers, the minor actors. When events of this magnitude (fire tragedy) occur, it becomes the onus of the company to try and polish their image (Mortisheadfsed, 2005, p. 8)
On the basis of the British petroleum case, there emerge a plethora of consequences that need to be examined. As is the case, companies thrive on good public image. After the tragedy, it was necessary to support an audit into the safety standards and subsequently implement the recommendations. As such, the safety standards were bound to improve considerably. Through the incorporation of such measures, the industry as a whole would thus move towards adopting similar approaches. On this basis, the ethical and governance aspect would get a huge reinforcement.
Another consequence could be the harm that the fire tragedy puts on the company. BP was an industry leader and a crisis of this kind was bound to compromise its leadership status in the market. The CSB report released its view on the company indicating that the company was profit oriented as opposed to the ethics and governance aspects. This is a misguided approach that would affect both the government and the public view on the company. On the process, the company directly jeopardises its market position. This shows the net effect of failing to respond to issues that directly impact on business.
The top management of BP is the most culpable of all the actors concerned. It has been found that audit recommendations have not been accounted for. The audit report that arose from the Texas