ShellNews.net: From a Shell Insider: “...Malcolm Brinded is certainly lying when he states that he did not know”: Mon 20 Feb 2006 04:27 AM EST
Mr Donovan 
  
  After reading some contributions to   your site of insiders it made me decide to share something with you and your   readers. Perhaps you see it fit to publish, I have no other avenue to vent my   frustration and very deep anger. 
  
  Of late the networks have highlighted   the treatment of prisoners by Americans in their prisons for presumed   terrorists. At least to me it has become very clear that there has been a   fundamental flaw in the command structure of the armed forces. And I am cynical   enough to believe this flaw was designed and knowingly created by the 'brass'   and top politicians. 
  
  They first brainwashed the soldiers (mostly non   professionals and reservists who only joined the army to have medical insurance   and get an education) via direct messages and via the various media that are   under their control to prepare them psychologically to commit acts that most of   them would never dream of doing in a normal life, whether or not these acts   comply with the Geneva Convention. I am a mere engineer and not a psychologist   so I am out of my depth here. But I am convinced that if you repeat messages   time and again that your enemies are all evil terrorists, people will start to   believe this, especially if they are in an elevated state of stress such as a   war in Iraq. Next the brass (from the president down) says that no stone must be   left unturned to get the truth out of the prisoners to defend the nation of good   citizens and god fearing Americans, and the foundation is laid to get excesses.   To top it off you put reserve personnel in charge of these prisons and   interrogation and on purpose do not arrange for extra controls to check how   things go, and you have disasters in the making. 
  
  Praise the   interrogators if they come up with some 'confessions' beaten out of prisoners,   real or simply made up, remove anyone that wants to say that this is wrong, and   the result is very easy to predict. No instructions to do bad things will be on   paper so the brass can always blame the little guys at the coalface. They   overstepped and need to be punished. And you hand out severe prison sentences to   simple soldiers who thought they were merely following orders. I guess this   happens in all wars and if you quickly score a victory, it can all be covered up   many years, enough to erase the tracks of the real culprits. The winner takes   all and is right! 
  
  However, in this era of digital cameras and internet,   there are fewer secrets. Images can be circulated globally and instantly. And   then there is real trouble and on a global scale. It is totally beyond me that   the advisors to the president and top brass did not see this coming. I leave   that to psychologists to analyze and explain. 
  
  Why this long   story and what does it have to do with Shell? 
  
  The whole   reserves problem as well as the extremely poor project management that Shell is   experiencing the last few years is almost a carbon copy of what happened to the   armed forces. Great changes, such as the large reorganisation started   by Herkstroeter in 1994, created great stress in the workforce. These changes   were considered unnecessary by Bob Sprague, one of the cleverest people who ever   worked for Shell. But initially this was still fairly positive stress and it led   to a feeling of freedom and desire to conquer and improve the world. Remember,   at that time we were the biggest and the best oil company and had been since the   mid 70s! So there was still a lot of latent know-how and professionalism around,   which the company cannibalised in creating a 'new Shell' with 'self managing   teams', 'Olympic targets', 'unleashing talent' and other trendy nonsense. It   even led to record profits in one year, I believe it was 1997. 
  
  But by   then the company was getting (with the explicit knowledge of the top brass) into   the hands of people who were only motivated by personal rewards, and who smelled   their chance. None of that 'Enterprise First' stuff. It was 'Me first' and all   the snouts were in the trough and nobody wanted to take their snout out of the   trough. Anyone complaining or making remarks that things were not right was   publicly destroyed and removed. And those with their snouts in the trough   started to make promises and ever more ridiculous demands. When Watts came to   power (he actually stole that job at the time with his gorilla talk and   behaviour) the pigs were truly feeding. Explicit instructions to cook the books   or 'err on the high side' were hardly given in written form or were at least   well disguised. It was said and whispered in meetings, conferences and workshops   and personal discussions during the annual staff evaluation time. There were   clear instructions to aim for the impossible with those stretched targets and   anyone who said he could go even further or higher was handsomely rewarded with   promotions or fat bonuses. 
  
  Brinded was a real champion of this,   he was #2 and later MD in Shell Expro and I believe they missed their business   targets for 7 years in a row under his reign! 
  
    So, the   foundation was laid and Watts started his circus with new and bigger promises   every year. And then it became unsustainable and the truth came out. We have   internet, everyone knows what has happened and why it happened. 
  
    But to prove that in a court of law will be very difficult. And   with the vast profits created by high oil prices, the top brass can buy all the   time they need and hire the most expensive lawyers to keep them out of prison.   All paid for with the shareholders' money. 
  
  To illustrate how   difficult it will be to prove, consider the following story. I recently   confronted a colleague who works on the Sakhalin project and told him that I had   known that the project would be severely over budget in early May 2005. The word   was out and a figure of $15.5 billion was being suggested by project managers   from Sakhalin. How come, I asked him, that Malcolm Brinded and Jeroen van der   Veer claim they did not know? The answer was very simple: Brinded was told there   were severe problems and his response was: 'give me a report as soon as you have   the exact details and know precisely how much and what'. This led to a further   delay and a week after the deal with Gazprom was announced, out came the   surprise statement of the $20 billion and enormous time overrun. But there are   probably no documents showing that Malcolm Brinded and Jeroen van der Veer knew.   They are genuinely clever people. But in my simple world, the boss should know   how his most expensive project is progressing, even if it is not exact all the   time. So, Malcolm Brinded is certainly lying when he states that he did not   know. He means he had no formal report. 
  
  And Jeroen van der Veer should   step down because he either knew and lied or he did not know and that is just as   bad for someone in his position. 
  
  I apologise for this longish   note but it helped to reduce my anger. I hope others will follow and you will   publish this on your great site. I think the top echelons in Shell by now know   there are no secrets anymore.