This is the second article in a seven-part series examining the changing dynamics of the oil and energy industry: Introduction | BP | Exxon | Chevron | Shell | Total | Statoil

The new year for BP has started with reports of thousands more job cuts, and the axing of a high-profile art sponsorship deal as the London-based major rushes to cut both operating and capital costs in the wake of historic losses for 2015 that surprised markets.

In the second part in a series of articles looking at how the world's biggest nonstate oil companies are adapting to change, let's look at how BP is adjusting to the new challenges of depressed oil prices. And how will the strategy affect the makeup of senior leadership at a company caught by sinking prices as it was struggling to overcome the legacy of the disastrous Deepwater Horizon spill in 2010?

On Feb. 2, BP reported its largest-ever annual loss — $5.2 billion. The figures were even worse than the historic losses of 2010, and shares shave fallen by around 40 percent since mid-2014.

For BP, the oil price slump could not have come at a worse time. The company was already deep in the process of divesting assets to pay for the monumental clean-up operation following Deepwater Horizon. Analysts estimate the oil spill costs will mount up to $54.6 billion.

On the back of the disaster, BP had pursued a "shrink to grow" strategy, selling rundown fields in favor of more promising frontiers. Some believe this put BP in a better position to cope when oil prices started their descent in mid-2014 — BP, apparently,was "not in bad nick." But there was more to come.

CEO Bob Dudley, an industry veteran, has seen the boom-and-bust cycles of the oil industry come and go before. Last month he predicted 2016 would be "a year of two halves" — a few more months of volatility followed by a price recovery reaching $50 to $60 per barrel by the end December once supply and demand are more balanced.

However, more aggressive cuts to capital and operating costs are in order across the portfolio, and Dudley has said BP has been forced to enter a restructuring phase that "reflects a faster pace" of cost-cutting across the company.

At all of the global majors, the list of deferred projects is growing, and BP is no exception. The Oil and Gas Journal describes how what began in 2014 as an E&P "haircut" has turned into a full blown "surgical procedure." Noncore projects at BP, such as the Mad Dog 2 project in the Gulf of Mexico, are shutting down until better supported by healthier per-barrel margins.

In North America, BP has shifted its onshore assets into the newly created "Lower 48" project. This 300,000 barrels of oil equivalent/day business spun off in early 2015 and aims to operate more efficiently and nimbly, mimicking and competing with the operations of the independents.

The new project will manage both conventional and unconventional assets, including plays in Eagleford and the Permian Basin, under the leadership David Lawler. However, executives reported that achieving growth in the Lower 48 at Henry Hub gas prices below $3 "could be a stretch."

For many investors, of course, the biggest question is how long BP can keep paying out its current dividend of over 7 percent, which the company has highlighted as its "first priority." Many doubt the sustainability, and even the wisdom, of maintaining the policy through 2016.

The majors have all jealously guarded payouts to shareholders, to the extent that companies have been forced to borrow heavily to cover dividend payments. In Feburary, Conoco became the first to jump and slash its own dividend by two-thirds in what the CEO called a difficult but prudent move. Italy's Eni followed suit in March in a bid to support cash flow.

The dividend question will be high on the agenda of Dudley. However, recent shakeups in senior leadership at BP have led to rumors that there may be further changes at the top, perhaps even unseating Dudley, who took over from Tony Hayward in the wake of 2010's spill.

Mississippi-born, Dudley played up childhood experiences of "crabbing and shrimping" in the Gulf and was appointed in an attempt to calm American public outrage after Hayward's insensitive handling of a crisis that threatened BP's activities in one of its most important jurisdictions. Despite BP's head office in London, as of 2010 39 percent of shareholders were American, as were half the board members.

BP is famous for its peculiar tradition of grooming so-called "turtles" — a name first used by former CEO John Browne in the 1990s for the posse of high-fliers chosen to be fast-tracked through the ranks. Hayward was a young "junior turtle," taken into the fold in his early 30s. Dudley became a turtle when Amoco merged with BP in 1998 and he caught Browne's attention.

In January, another American — 57-year old Lamar McKay — was appointed to the revived position of deputy CEO, putting him firmly in Dudley's shadow as the major's Number 2. BP had denied any hint of a succession, insisting McKay, a BP upstream veteran, is taking on the expanded role to help the company navigate through the tough waters of the ongoing oil price crisis. That hasn't, however, stopped the industry rumor mill from gossiping over who the new heir-apparent is likely to be.

In turn, McKay's position as upstream chief will be taken up by Bernard Looney, one of the youngest to ever take up the role. 45-year-old Irish-born Looney has also risen rapidly through the BP bureaucracy, starting out as a graduate engineer in the North Sea petro-hub of Aberdeen. Distinguished for his youth and charisma, he may also be a dark horse for the top job if there indeed is a transfer of power in the next 12 to 18 months.

The management shakeup may be a signal of a new direction for BP as it lurches from one crisis to another. A key question will be whether BP can keep investors happy, many of whom have grown used to generous payouts during the good times.

By slimming down the company and restructuring its U.S. operations, BP will have to get itself in good enough shape to keep the support of shareholders through what many see to be an inevitable dividend cut in the second half of 2016.