Haywood and Obama -- Leadership

Haywood and Obama -- Leadership Styles During BP Gulf Crisis

Introduction (BP Oil Spill, Background)- the Gulf of Mexico British Petroleum oil spill, also known as the Deepwater Oil Disaster, was one of the largest, most damaging, and most controversial oil disasters ever. The spill itself began on April 20, 2010 with an explosion on the Deepwater Horizon Oil platform, killing 11, injuring 17. It was not until July 15th, however, that the leak was stopped by capping the wellhead, after releasing almost 5 million barrels (206 million gallons) of crude oil, or 53,000 barrels per day into the Gulf of Mexico. It was not until September 19th that the relief well process was complete and the U.S. Government, EPA, and Coast Guard agencies declared the well breach effectively stopped (Cavnar, 2010).

The damage caused by the spill is almost immeasurable; ecological, political, economic, social -- it almost devastated the U.S. Gulf Coast fishing and tourism industries. Even in January 2011 a report was made by oil-spill experts from the University of Georgia stating that tar balls continue to wash up on beaches, collect in shrimp nets, kill marsh grass, and even undegraded oil in the seabed (Dykes, 2011). It will likely be years, if not decades, before the final assessment of damage, short-term and long-term, is accurately noted from this disaster.

Reactions, as one can imagine, ranged from blame to outrage to sadness that modern multinational corporations could still allow such unmitigated ecological sloppiness to occur. Some blamed British Petroleum, some the U.S. Government for a lack of oversight in providing stricter guidelines for drilling; others a combination -- all noted that greater accountability would be necessary in dealing with situation like this -- preventative measures, cleanup improvements, and economic solutions. The U.S. Government unequivocally named BP as the responsible party for the disaster, and officials up to the President have publically stated they will hold the company accountable for all cleanup costs and damage. In fact, after months of investigation and an untold amount of money, even BP acknowledged that it had been lax in certain areas and had made serious mistakes leading up to the disaster. Regardless of the viewpoint, however, both sides do agree that the situation will have long-term consequences for future deep-water drilling efforts globally (National Commission, 2011).

Naturally, there are a number of issues that should be studied in relation to this crisis; there are engineering questions, moral questions, a wide-range of economic questions, procedural questions, and certainly political questions. However, one seminal issue that focuses attention on the crisis is the leadership skills, or lack thereof, shown by the two most public figures involved: U.S. President Barack Obama and BP Corporation CEO Tony Hayward. Reviewing public speeches, memos, and even directives, one cannot help but be saddened that neither Obama nor Hayward exhibited the type of leadership necessary to lead the public through this crisis -- in fact, their performance shows a decided lack of leadership and more of a tend towards knee-jerk management. Leaders, we recall, are charged with the role of embracing managerial attributes and the ability to make the right decisions at the right time. The outcomes of the decisions will be used as the benchmark to evaluate whether the leader is successful (Drucker, 2001). Management and leadership are not synonymous even if they are typically used that way. Leaders do not have subordinates, they have followers. Leadership inspires, motivates and sets the direction to achieve goals; leaders focus on people. Both people and organizations want leaders. People want leaders to assist them in accomplishing their goals. Organizations want leaders to not only motivate, but to provide organizational direction for employees to follow. According to Kouzes and Posner (1994), five key behaviors for what is wanted of leaders from both people and organizations are: "(a) challenge the process, (b) inspire a shared vision, (c) enable others to act, (d) model the way, and (e) encourage the heart" (Kouzes and Posner, 1994, 960). This is the basic rubric we will use to evaluate the efficacy of Obama and Hayward in their overall approach to the oil spill issue.

Tony Haywood Background and Response -- Tony Hayward is a British businessman and joined British petroleum as a rig geologist in 1982, quickly rising through the ranks in a number of increasingly complex roles, finally becoming the CEO of the company in May 2007. His tenure ended with BP in October 2010, largely due, most believe, because of the circumstances and his management of the BP oil crisis in the Gulf (Milmo, 2010). Perhaps Hayward was hoping for a quick fix, or did not quite understand the enormity of this crisis, because he initially downplayed the incident by referring to a "very big ocean" and a "relatively tiny" amount of oil leaked with a potential impact as "very modest" (Webb, 2010). Needless to say, over the course of the next several weeks, that "very modest" impact seemed like an inappropriate response. It was not that Hayward lacked empathy for the situation, but it seemed the crisis so integrated his personal life that he found that an appropriate example for the world. On May 27th he changed his view from modest to an "environmental catastrophe," and on May 30th told a reporter, "we're sorry for the massive disruption [the spill] caused to… lives… There's no one who wants this thing over more than I do, I'd like my life back (Durando, 2010). Widely criticized as a selfish comment, it was likely not made in that vein, but certainly phrased in a way that may have seen more victim than leader. Subsequently, on June 2nd, Hayward apologized for the "hurtful and thoughtless comment when I said that I wanted my life back" (BP Chief Apologizes, 2010).