By Nnamdi Okorie
Sir: In late 2014, one of the most dramatic price shifts in petroleum markets unfolded. Brent crude, which had been trading above $110 per barrel mid-year, spiraled downward to below $57 by December, reflecting oversupply and demand weakness. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, this collapse was one of the sharpest in recent history.
For oil-dependent economies, and for companies operating in that sector, it was a watershed: profitability took a nosedive, debt became harder to service, and capital discipline replaced ambition as the immediate priority.
In Nigeria, where oil accounts for 80.8% to 88.3% of total export revenue and around 70% to 85% of government revenue, the macroeconomic shock was profound
But for students of corporate resilience, the real lesson lies not in the macro narrative, but in how firms survived and why influence, networks or “advantage” proved negligible when the fundamentals collapsed. A recent three-part documentary on Oando Plc underscores this point with unusual clarity: reputational capital provides entry, but markets respond to liquidity, risk management and execution.
It is a common talking point in Nigerian business that success is shaped by connections or surnames. This view often surfaces in discussions of wealthy entrepreneurs and political elites, particularly when their achievements are shared with the public through memoirs or media stories. Such narratives are easy to digest, but they obscure a harder reality: markets are indifferent to brand or biography.
When oil prices plunged in 2014, firms everywhere faced harsh operating conditions. Deloitte’s post-crash energy outlook documented widespread layoffs, project cancellations and balance sheet strain across the sector. It was no respecter of privilege.
That environment became a testing ground for every energy company with leveraged assets and debt. The global majors tightened belts. Independent players restructured. What mattered most was capital allocation discipline, not narrative capital.
At the time of the crash, Oando was engaged in one of the largest expansion transactions in its history, the acquisition of ConocoPhillips’ Nigerian business for just over $1.5 billion [AB1] [AB2]. This deal significantly expanded Oando’s upstream footprint, but it also coincided with the worst downturn in the oil cycle in a generation.
Execution risk under such conditions is acute. Financing windows shrink, working capital costs rise, and field operations must be adjusted to lower price realities. But the documentary captures a critical reality: Oando’s challenges were strictly operational, not political.
Just as markets collapsed across continents, this acquisition required integration under adverse price conditions. That the firm completed it while maintaining production continuity suggests sustained operational discipline rather than short-term advantage.
Perhaps the most revealing part of the documentary comes through the testimony of the Chief Corporate Services & Sustainability Officer, Ayotola Jagun who recalls leadership rejecting the widespread cost-cutting reflex that gripped the industry. Instead of layoffs or pay cuts, the firm chose to retain technical staff and preserve institutional memory.
This decision aligns with research showing that layoffs in downturns often erode productivity and prolong recovery phases. Talent retention in capital-intensive sectors is not sentimental. Skilled engineers, reservoir managers and production planners are expensive to replace and time-consuming to train.
To address the persistent perception that Oando’s survival is a product of political patronage, the documentary’s most compelling insight is its timeline of institutional independence. Oando’s growth as a major brand spans more than three decades, beginning long before the current political landscape. The film traces this evolution to the acquisition of UniPetrol in 2000, establishing a foundation of institutional capability well ahead of contemporary power alignments.
As a publicly listed, integrated energy company accountable to thousands of shareholders and subject to regulatory and market scrutiny across multiple cycles, Oando operates within constraints that personal proximity to power cannot override. Its endurance reflects systems tested by commodity crashes, regulatory delays, and capital market pressure. In that sense, time itself becomes the most credible audit.
This context matters because Nigeria’s energy sector is undergoing a broader transition. As International Oil Companies divest onshore assets, indigenous operators have increasingly stepped in. Transactions such as Seplat Energy’s acquisition of ExxonMobil’s shallow-water assets and Oando’s purchase of ConocoPhillips’ Nigerian assets demonstrate that local capital structures can close large deals. What differentiates outcomes, however, is not the transaction itself, but post-acquisition execution under volatility.
The documentary’s implicit lesson is that operational competence, not perceived advantage, defines corporate survival in volatile markets. Influence cannot hedge price collapses. Regulation friction, supply corrections and demand slowdowns do not respond to name recognition. They respond to liquidity and risk mitigation.
Nigeria’s energy policy, including the Decade of Gas strategy, assumes a more active role for domestic players in shaping downstream and midstream assets. What will separate winners from laggards in this next phase is how firms manage capital, risk and execution, not who they know.
Nnamdi Okorie is a business strategy and leadership analyst based in Abuja.
In this article