Race to the bottom? Hayward vs Obama
As the Washington Post posed the question about who has been least effective in handling the Gulf Coast oil spill, I say It really does not matter whether President Obama or BP CEO Tony Hayward has been the least effective. What matters is that we need both men to demonstrate excellent leadership during this crisis, and unfortunately both have fallen short in that regard. Crises are marked by time constraints, ambiguity, remarkably unusual circumstances, limited or conflicting information, and a need for immediate and decisive action; not to mention anxious stakeholders, naïve observers, and aggressive media who all want information and answers. Given these pressures, the demands of a leader in crisis can be unique and require a different set of abilities than what would typically be expected during non-crisis times. Both President Obama and Mr. Hayward have demonstrated capability in non-crisis situations, but as evidenced by their performance to date, it does not appear that either of them has what it takes to lead under the intense pressure and scrutiny that crises pose.
But, for all the criticism that Obama has received over his lack of emotion over the spill and his inability to stop the flow of oil, let’s keep in mind two things: First, it was precisely his ability to remain calm under pressure during the financial crisis that contributed to his election. Remaining calm and level-headed is precisely the temperament that is needed in a crisis. Second, neither Obama nor his administration has the financial resources or the expertise to stop the spill, so the focus of the criticism in this regard is misplaced. Obama and his administration must work collaboratively to both stop the spill and execute a clean-up effort. Having just returned from a day of meetings with people at the National Incident Command Center for the Deepwater Horizon oil spill I have seen first-hand this collaboration in progress.
What concerns me more about Obama’s handling of the oil spill is that he is reacting too much to the external pressures of various interest groups without seemingly first having devised a vision for the short and long-term future of oil exploration and alternative energy and a concrete strategy for achieving that vision. To develop the strategy requires that he have frank conversations with oil executives, policy-makers, local government, environmental groups, and other key stakeholders. The impact of his decisions on deep water drilling will have immeasurable economic impact in this country and around the world, and even temporary decisions like the moratorium on deep water drilling in the gulf seemed to have been made without the benefit of adequate perspective-taking.
As for Hayward, the PR mistakes he personally has made are legendary and have resulted in the perception of extremely poor leadership. As a result, he no longer has the credibility to speak empathetically about the spill despite his admissions of BP’s responsibility and accountability. The oil industry is run by engineers and communication is generally not their focus, nor is it necessarily a core competency. So, although as CEO Hayward needed to have been visible in the aftermath of the crisis, it is not always the case that the CEO is the best person to put forward to the media; nor is it always in the best interest of crisis resolution to have the CEO’s time and other resources absorbed in PR activities. My criticism with Hayward is the apparent lack of leadership in the decision-making that led to the initial oil rig explosion and in the failure to identify and integrate key learnings from previous tragic events BP has experienced (e.g, the 2005 Texas City, TX refinery explosion). How many more catastrophic events will it take before Hayward and BP’s leadership team takes seriously the importance of being a learning organization?