Author: Jodi O'Callaghan
Picture this: You’re an employee of BP in the United States. The organisation you work for has blood (and oil … lots of it) on its hands for what is being touted as the worst environmental disaster in history. It’s possible you’re beginning to cop intense criticism from family and friends questioning the ethics and legitimacy of the organisation that employs you and how you can continue to work for such an organisation. It’s also possible you’re disgusted by what has happened, the impact it is having on the environment and embarrassed to be employed by them. If you’re not already out there looking for a new job, you may indeed soon be, as speculation begins to emerge about BP’s survival as a result of this disaster.
Now picture this: You’re the communications executive at BP charged with managing crisis communications, the media, public perception and the company’s reputation. In addition to most likely feeling everything an employee would be feeling (that’s ultimately what you are after all), you’re advising the CEO on what to say, having to hold your own in the ring of fire that is the court of public opinion, and answering questions from the media explaining and possibly defending an organisation — your organisation – that has behaved not just badly, but appallingly. As a communications executive for an organisation like BP, you’re no doubt a pretty tough nut and certainly no stranger to controversy.
But this is only how it appears to an outsider. Evidently the communications executive didn’t value nor practice ethical business communication and the culture of the organisation soon became apparent when, at one point, on downplaying the oil rig explosion, related deaths and subsequent oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, BP CEO Tony Hayward stated the incident wasn’t just a disruption to local residents, but also himself, and that “You know, I’d like my life back”.
What the? How can an organisation, as big and powerful as BP, not have a strategy in place, with clear messages ready to execute, in anticipation of an (inevitable) environmental disaster? Isn’t crisis preparedness based on the premise that an organisation prepares for an issue that could strike resulting in intense public and media attention, threatening reputation and thus its capacity to carry out its business? Not surprisingly, it has since emerged there were no robust crisis preparations in place, highlighting the culture of arrogance within BP, its lack of regard for its workers, the environment it plunders for profit, and its lack of ethical approach to communication.
Not long after the horrendous “I’d like my life back” comment, BP hired public affairs heavyweight and former spokesperson for Dick Cheney and Head of Public Affairs for the US Department of Energy Anne Kolton to manage BP’s response to the disaster and subsequent messages. Soon after Kolton was hired, the message from Hayward was that BP was sorry and “We will make this right”. But in the unforgiving world of public opinion, it was too little, too late from the head of the organisation. An apology and empty promise wasn’t going to make this right, nor would it reverse the damage already done to the environment ... and its reputation.
No matter how experienced the heavyweight, how sorry the company said they were, or how much time and effort is given to controlling the messages coming from the company, the world of social media provides public citizens with a vehicle to vent their rage. Facebook has enabled these public citizens to gain groundswell at a grassroots level with the Facebook page ‘Boycott BP’ currently having more than 675,000 members. Not only does this group have a presence on the web, they have a voice and they have influence.
In an unprecedented attempt to make a company accountable for their lack of risk management and laissez faire approach to environmental concern, BP’s leadership team was intensely scrutinised and questioned by the United States Congress and berated by the United States President on national television, with the footage being broadcast globally. While the US Government bailed out Wall St during the global financial crisis (GFC), no such relief is being provided to BP – they are being held accountable and punished, both reputationally and financially, and rightly so – with a US$20 billion compensation fund due to be paid by BP to various individuals and groups impacted by the disaster over the coming years.
The GFC has become an event from which organisations are being forced to reflect on their current business practices and re-evaluate the way they do business to enable them to survive financially, socially and culturally. While this recent disaster from BP is post-GFC, it only adds to the intense imperative for organisations and their communications advisors to fully comprehend and prepare to consider more than just financial capital, and be answerable to more than just its shareholders.
The GFC has highlighted that governments and business simply cannot afford to ignore the affect greed has had on the economy, society and the environment. It is up to professional communicators to have a voice at the management table and ensure businesses are behaving ethically and managing more than just a financial bottom line.
As BP go in to their 63rd day of the damaged pipe spewing out an estimated 35,000 to 60,000 barrels of crude oil per day with maximum damage to marine and wildlife habitats, tourism and local business, I wonder if this is the oil spill that will finally make governments and the business world see there is no future for organisations that have such a flippant attitude to the environment and lack of regard for ethical business practice, particularly when they are exploiting natural resources and profiting from it. Consideration must be given to the organisation’s triple bottom line – financial, social and environmental – to be regarded as legitimate by consumers.
While horrific, this disaster could provide an opportunity for governments to gain unprecedented support from society (individuals, families, workers, unions, small and big business and all groups in between) for the introduction of legislation that makes organisations more accountable. And not just through harsher penalties after disaster has struck but the legal requirement for organisation’s to invest in and measure environmental capital as part of their business performance.
Is BP learning any lessons along the way as it navigates through the oily waters of this disaster? Apparently not …Much to the dismay and frustration of the White House, Hayward was taking some ‘time out’ from the disaster yesterday watching his yacht in a race off the Isle of Wight. Perhaps in addition to being the worst environmental disaster in history, there is new scope for this case to be labelled as the worst PR disaster in history.
