|
I seem to be in the minority (or perhaps the silent majority) when it comes to bashing BP over the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico. I have praised BP’s communication efforts several times in my crisis communication blog. I remain a fan of BP’s crisis communications, but with a caveat or two.
I believe BP has been up front with the media and the affected coastal residents and fishermen. I believe BP is doing the best it can as fast as it can to stop the flow of oil and clean up the sticky tide arriving at the coast. I have never tried to stop a gushing oil leak a mile under the ocean, so what would give me the right to criticize the effort? Nothing. That’s the same thing that BP bashers should be saying as they critique its effort to stop or reduce the leak: nothing. Those who have called for the government to take over the operation are forgetting something. No one in government has more experience in dealing with oil crises than BP. How often have you seen Washington take over anything from private enterprise with glowing results? President Obama didn’t start pounding his fist until he was criticized for not taking charge. BP is motivated to fix this thing because it is losing money and stock value every day the leak continues.
All this affects communication. BP has been criticized from all quarters for not providing accurate information. I contend that the criticism of BP’s crisis communication is driven by frustration over its technical failures and under-estimations of the quantity of oil leaking into the Gulf each day. For nearly two months, the messages from BP have expressed optimism that the latest plan will work. Alas, the company has to return to tell reporters that the latest attempt has failed. We can’t confuse bad news with bad communication.
Everything I want and need to know about the oil leak is on BP’s web site. I believe the information it contains is the best known at the time it is posted. If you think you are smarter than the engineers who are trying to figure out a solution, there’s even a spot on the web site for you to submit your ideas.
Another site to check out is the web site of Deepwater Horizon, the company that operated the drilling rig. In addition to the site, Deepwater Horizon runs a Facebook page that is updated several times a day as new information surfaces. You may also want to subscribe to the company’s up-to-the-minute text messages.
The major criticism I have about BP’s crisis communication is spelled CEO. BP’s CEO Tony Hayward has regularly misspoken and delivered messages he didn’t intend to deliver. His greatest gaffe came when, out of tiredness and frustration, he said, “You know, I’d like my life back.” That had to be well received by the families of those oil workers who perished in the oil rig fire. Other Haywardisms include: “The spill is not going to cause big problems because the Gulf is a very big ocean” and “The environmental impact of this disaster is likely to have been very, very modest.”
Hayward could be the all-time poster child for one of the sacred rules we have at the Institute for Crisis Management: Don’t let the CEO be your primary spokesperson. That can be tough because many CEOs got to where they are by being take-charge egomaniacs. Hayward illustrates over and over again why the CEO shouldn’t be your company spokesperson. When he misspeaks or when he delivers messages that later turn out to be false, there is no one else in the organization to turn to. If the CEO doesn’t know what he’s talking about, then no one does.
Early on, Hayward should have expressed sympathy for the families of the 11 workers who lost their lives, pledged to discover the cause to reduce the chances of a similar catastrophe happening in the industry, promised to cooperate with all government agencies investigating the explosion, and assured people that he personally would work to ensure that all the oil is cleaned up and that all those who depend on the Gulf for their livelihoods will be compensated for their losses. Then, Tony, go away and work behind the scenes. Come out of your burrow only when you need to show the public you are working hard to coordinate the details about stopping the leak, cleaning up the Gulf and treating coastal residents fairly.
I believe the quantity and quality of crisis communication has been about as good as it could be in such a horrific disaster. If I could change anything, it would definitely be the spokesperson for the company, who has been undermined the past few weeks by the government spokesperson, U.S. Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen. As a result, BP has lost control of the messages it could have been delivering if a competent company spokesperson had been in place.
Dan Hicks, ABC, has been a journalist and business communicator for 30 years. He currently serves as senior consultant with the Institute for Crisis Management headquartered in Louisville, Kentucky. Dan also has held communication positions at Rohm and Haas, Westinghouse, Rockwell International, and Boise Cascade. He earned an IABC Gold Quill Award in 1994. Contact him at
. |
