How Did BP Oil Spill?

In 2010, BP encountered two predicaments. The first was stopping a major oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico after an oilrig exploded. The second was persuading people that they were doing just so.

The company damaged its environmentally friendly image when the Deepwater Horizon oilrig exploded in the Gulf of Mexico on April 20, 2010, eventually creating the largest marine oil spill in history. Eleven workers were killed, an estimated 6,000 barrels of oil leaked per day, and years of irreversible damage occurred to countless marine life. However drastic these circumstances, BP’s true nightmare proved to be their lack of effective public relations efforts.

Communication, action, and empathy are crucial in a proper response to a serious crisis. Unfortunately, BP lacked all three.
Shortly after the initial explosion, BP officials claimed that the rig was leaking just 1,000 barrels of oil per day.
However, the U.S federal government estimated the number to be closer to 6,000 barrels of oil, which instantly hurt BP’s credibility. “… The Gulf of Mexico is a very big ocean. The amount of oil and dispersant we are putting into it is tiny in relation to the total water volume,” said then BP CEO Tony Hayward, in an attempt to downplay the disaster. Yet, as the oil continued to spill in the weeks following the initial explosion, U.S government officials and the general public began to realize the disastrous environmental effects that the spill would ultimately cause. The company’s lack of truthful communication led to distrust among the public.

BP also failed to take responsibility, as well as proper action, during the aftermath of the rig explosion. In an interview with ABC, BP CEO Tony Hayward said:

“Ah, this wasn’t our accident. This was a drilling rig operated by another company. It was their people, their systems, and their processes. We are responsible not for the accident but we are responsible for the oil, dealing with it and cleaning the situation
up.”

BP should have taken responsibility for their actions and assured the public that they’d work tirelessly to right their wrongs, yet the company attempted to deflect the blame away from their selves. Evidently, their comments proved insensitive. In addition, BP released many advertisements and commercials assuring the public that they “will make this right.” President Obama argued that rather than spending thousands of dollars on commercial advertisements, the company should have allocated the funds used on ads towards oil cleanup and compensation to fishermen and businesses. BP’s inherent lack of responsibility led to a lack of action, which proved the company to be tactless during this crisis.

In the end, BP’s lack of empathy toward all parties involved caused the downfall of their public image. On May 31, 2010, in a conversation with reporters, Tony Hayward said, “There’s no one who wants this over more than I do. I would like my life back.” Most can agree that the eleven workers killed and thousands of marine animals would most certainly like their lives back as well. BP officials, mainly their CEO, did not empathize with the difficulties of those immediately affected. Rather, the company’s CEO felt as if his inconveniences and troubles were comparable to those directly damaged by the disaster at hand.

It is important for companies to recognize that their leaders are the ultimate face of the crisis. Had Tony Hayward addressed the crisis differently from the first day of the accident, BP might have retained some of their positive public image. One international crisis is hard enough, but two is like fighting fire with oil.