BP chief Hayward steps down after $17 billion quarterly loss

Whilst it is still fashionable to blame everything on the hapless Mr. Hayward it is a fact that his responsibility for this matter is fairly minimal.

The real blame lies with the Board - including Hayward - and senior management for allowing a corporate culture to exist at BP whereby they are unable to respond in an appropriate manner to any 'curved ball' that comes their way.

Whilst Hayward is probably a damn fine 'oil-man' was he ever the right person to run BP in what increasingly appears to be a role that lacked fully integrated support systems of the highest quality? To go further, could/can anyone do the job as matters stand?

In my humble opinion of the two, Shell has always been the better run company and until there is a total cultural shake up at BP it will continue to be so.

yet again self satisfied incompetent British management handsomely rewarded while anyone else would face the boot. It appears the whole management class just looking out for themselves, and us lot are expected to carry the can. Well we do dont we, time after time.

Clearly management self interest culture and poor accountability have been at the root of Britain's ills for a good while, just getting worse. So many cases. Banks, Rover/MG, BP etc etc.

Where do Morrison's get their petrol ? Well LPG for me - 20% less emissions.

He gets a million pounds?? And then he's shipped off to another job with the same company so he will still be drawing a salary.

Well, obviously I'm glad to see an American at the top. He's been down here on the Gulf getting his hands dirty. Maybe he really understands the problem. Hayward was not totally responsible for the issue, but he certainly didn't show that he cared either. I don't care if he has his life back. I'd like to see all the people and the sea life that have been affected here have their lives back.

Shell better run? Diagree.

I worked for Shell- but left ,cos of the Dutch induced stultifying bureaucracy. Years later was involved with Shell in the development of aircraft jet engine synlubes- old colleagues say still suffering from it.

Collaborated later with BP Research for Concorde synlube- what a difference,- an open and unpredudiced attitude at BP.

Once again- a reward for supposed incompetence involving an obcene pension contact. He, like all his director peers, are purely employees of the company, not entrepreneurs risking their own money.

Leonard,

Thanks for your comments.

Stultifying and dull your particular experience at Shell may have been but so what?

The fact is that today BP is still fighting to bring itself back from the edge of oblivion whereas Shell is beginning to do just fine.

As an investor I think and have always thought that BP was best avoided, hence my not insubstantial investment in Shell.

That Shell is conservative and has a high yield suits me just fine, though I can understand that for some working in certain divisions it would be a nightmare .

I am told that Exxon is not much fun.

Anyway, each to their own.

If you take a look at the corporate structure of second tier oil exploration and production companies you will find that most have cross holdings in each others projects. This concept seems to be working for them as downside risk is shared. It also provides for a means by which knowledge can be pooled. However, legally speaking, these contracts leave no doubt as to who is the "operator" and where the buck stops.

In view of BP's poor safety record at Sakalin, Alaska, Texas, and now G.O.M. the company will find it very difficult to convince governments to grant it exploration licences in the future. This may or may not be a good thing, as some analysts believe there is not much oil left to find anyway.

If BP is to survive in one piece, the board may decide that its best option is to not bid for operational licences, but to partner other explorers as a means to replace its resource.

Whatever happens Mr Dudley has a hard task ahead of him and investors will be scrutinising his loyalties.

A million pounds, a top job and a most certain comfortable future. So, Hayward has his life back!

How will Dudley explain / justify this outcome to the thousands directly affected by the oil spill?

Not only is this situation a very hot potato for Dudley and his team (obviously the board have been very strategic in the appointment) but also very hard to swallow, knowing full well Hayward will be swilling vodkas with his new Russian comrades.

This reflects the general 'don't-give-a-f...' attitude by big business' executives. No wonder climate change action is going nowhere, other than major talk fests that resolve nothing.

The human race deserves all that's occurring and wait, there's more coming....

Good luck. Over and out.