Blogs
Videos
Podcasts
White Papers
Hayward Stepping Down as BP’s CEO: What Will We Do Without a Scapegoat
July 26, 2010 – 8:36 amWhen something bad happens, people often look for a scapegoat to blame for all that went wrong.
In the case of the Deepwater blowout, that scapegoat was Tony Hayward, the BP’s CEO.
 |
| Tony Hayward |
Today, Hayward announced that he is stepping down from the CEO position and will take a job at BP’s joint venture in Russa.
Hayward certainly didn’t cause the oil spill–he wasn’t even on the rig when it happened. But he was the very public face of BP, and he took the fall for it.
Boy, did he ever.
Maybe Hayward didn’t react the way the public expected when the spill happened. After all, there were reports that he was out yachting with his son when he was supposed to be working out a way to clean up the oil. He claimed he wishes he “had his life back.” (Certainly a case of “Be careful what you wish for!”)
Well, the public called for his head, and they got it. Hayward is stepping down, and there will be a new sheriff in town (most likely Bob Dudley, who once ran TNK-BP, the Russian company Hayward will go work for).
Will Hayward being gone get the oil spill cleaned up faster? Who knows. But now the torches and pitchforks will be set down for a bit. At least, of course, until they’re pointed at someone else.
What do you think of Hayward leaving his position as CEO of BP? What should Hayward have done while he was CEO?
By Jessica Livingston
10 Responses to “Hayward Stepping Down as BP’s CEO: What Will We Do Without a Scapegoat”
Dear Jessica,
on his position and in front of the magnitude of the event I understand that Mr.Tony Hayward should went with his best Offshore Drilling expertises, and install on the closest location of the accident an Emergency Comity, to run and follow operations on site, this is a situation that requires good thinking and quick but not hastily decisions .
Best regards,
Eduardo
By Eduardo G. Machain on Jul 27, 2010
This is quite simple. Hayward is losing his job because, through his handling of the incident, has become a liability to BP. A key role of the CEO in times of crisis is to protect corporate reputation, which he failed to do. The Board of BP has the responsibility to do what is best for the company without regard for whether it hurts the CEO, and they did it. CEO’s are paid as they are to be accountable.
By Greg Rogers on Jul 27, 2010
In my view, accountability is the issue here. Being the CEO of BP, he is accountable and responsible for what BP did or did not. In this case, BP failed to curtail the spill and even could not come public with some serious plans in the beginning. We must understand that this was not a mere spill but a major environmental catestrope.
On the other hand, it worked as a saviour for another industry – surveyors, cleaners, EIA companies – who were struggling due to spend restriction due to the ongoing recession.
By Ismayil Manzil on Jul 27, 2010
This is all a bit odd. The Rig was designed by Francis & Bacon,a US company, built by Hyundai of Korea, F&B taken over by Transocean, operated by Transocean (a Houston company listed in Switzerland for tax reasons), well services incl. cementing provided by Halliburton, other services from Schlumberger, and well owned by Amoco/ BP. After the catalogue of errors from Americans, (for the 3rd time), an American is to replace Tony!
By David on Jul 27, 2010
I seem to remember that the US company Occidental caused a disaster in the North Sea off Scotland . Numerous people were burned to death in a horrible way (250 so far as I remember).
People in the UK were shocked to their core but they didn’t crucify Occidental in the way that the US Govt and people have crucified BP.
It’s typical of US Govt to attack foreign companies whilst “turning a blind eye” to the misdeads of their own companies such as Union Carbide in India, where thousandswere wereilled.
All of this is caused by the US consumer, who demands cheap “Gas”, and the exceptionally poor performance of US regulators in comparison to EuropeanRegulators, who actually lift their butts off their office chairs and get around to see what is going on in the field.
Americans active on this site should be ashamed of their country’s safety record at home and abroad.
By Ron Gee on Jul 28, 2010
I agree with most of the comments made especially Ron and Greg in that the US tend to make pariahs of foreign companies working in US soil and that Tony failed to bring the right image in reaction to the Horizon tragedy so must step down. He simply “lost face” with the public and that’s a job killer. Tony isn’t directly responsible, but indirectly he and many other senior managers at BP still cultivated the acceptance of the very poor decisions that led to the blow up.
To me, it doesn’t matter who designed, built and even operated the rig when the event occurred but who made the decisions that led up to the event. Don’t blame a car manufacturer or even the driver if the person in charge is saying “turn left into that wall”!
By Michael Dougherty on Jul 28, 2010
I guess that this is the new world order,”You remain the boss as long as things are runing smoothly, but you automatically becomes the villain as soon as anything goes wrong”!!, no second chance.My question is ,if i hit my Benz car accidentally or unintentionally against a brick wall, should i sue or blame the CEO of Daimler Chrisler Benz Germany for that as well?
By Abraham C .E on Jul 28, 2010
The changes at BP were necessary to calm the market, put a line under what happened and move forward. No-one doubts the experience and the capability of Tony Hayward in terms of running the company, but what this entire scenario proves to us is the desperate need for the CEO of any company to be able to communicate well, especially in times of disaster. I recently offered an article about company reputation and the fall-out to be learned from the BP story to a leading Middle East oil & gas magazine. They responded that such an article was more suited to a PR/Communications magazine. How wrong they are.. the energy industry needs to learn how to protect its reputation and to be prepared and willing to communicate a strong message to re-assure stakeholders, especially in times of crisis.
By Eithne Treanor on Jul 30, 2010
Drill Rig details are important since it reportedtly had defects in US F&B design. Not necessarily known to Amoco/BP but should have been known to TRANSOCEAN.
Another wonderful US design I don’t think.
Americans won’t debate this issue because of the Occidental shambles and Union Carbide incompetence.
Another great performance from the USA I don’t think.
Think of the 5 P’s:
Poor Planning results in Piss-poor performance.
That’s US Inc.
By David on Jul 30, 2010
I agree with all of you who have commented; Obviously the US government is the villain and therefore the US citizens who have elected this President.
It was unbecoming of character for US president to interfere in this affair to the extent of visiting Pensecola beaches and looking for oil in the sand.
He was definitely pandering to the needs of voters.
By Narasimhan Rajagopal on Aug 10, 2010