At one point, he looked like this:
and this:
But not anymore. Oh no. Today when you see Tony, his face is all scrunched up like this:
He even made a video of his scrunched up face. BP bought commercial airtime during the major network news programs to show you his scrunched up face.
In fact, Tony would like to stop making the scrunched up face. Here he declares he wants his life back:
I don't know what is more annoying:
1) The risk assessment that determined measures preventing an eminent mechanical breakdown were more costly to implement than the cost of clean up efforts after the breakdown occurred.
2) By boycotting BP gas stations, there is a better chance that we are doing more damage to the small business owner of the station, than BP.
3) Oil is going to be washing up on the shores of the Gulf Of Mexico forever. (Did you know that oil from the Exxon Valdez is still showing up on the shores of Alaska?).
or
4) The vast number of dollars, BP spent coaching Tony to use that scrunched up face. Not to mention, the self-piteous tone to his voice, or saying the words that we all want to hear--regardless of whether or not they're true.
It's a tough call. But today I have to say it's #4. But I really should feel sorry for Tony. For goodness sakes, he wants his life back. Maybe we can get Bob Geldof to throw him a rock concert. It can be called Face Aid.
At the very least, maybe we can all pitch in and hire a clown to stop by his office to cheer him up.
(This post was inspired by an editorial comment in a newspaper suggesting that it was unfair to be so hard on BP. I guess if you have the right PR, you can alter sympathies from the victims to the perpetrators.)
Posts
3 Comments:
love your perspective, paul...always do. while i agree boycotting BP gas stations might hurt the small business owner more than BP, i think it still needs to happen - it sends a message. BP gas station owners made an investment (just like many who bought stock in BP) and they carry a risk with that investment (just like many who bought stock in BP). it's how the world goes round - Boycott BP at whatever level you can.
I'm sure I'll get some flack for this but... I do feel sorta sorry for the guy.
He runs a company that makes a product that EVERY SINGLE PERSON WORLDWIDE relies on (okay - might be a couple of folks in the jungles of South America or Africa get by on burning cow dung) for their lives - from transportation to heating and cooling.
He works for a company that employs tons of people and many folks own shares in and has a responsibility to those folks.
Every organization makes risk assessments on every business decision. Would we be mad at Tony if the cost to ABSOLUTELY prevent this event made fuel $200 a gallon? I think not. We'd be saying it was irresponsible to make that decision.
Overall - my concern is this: If you made the decision to take on the risk - you need to make a move to mitigate it by finding ways to solve the problem should it occur.
From my point of view - if they had spent some time figuring out "how do we react IF the weird stuff happens" and could have fixed it within days the story would have been a blip.
It's the lack of vision that this is a POSSIBILITY that is a bit reprehensible. Black Swans are out there and as the risk goes up - the effort to mitigate it needs to go up as well.
I also think this may be the trigger that drives further investment into hydrogen and other alternatives - which may in the long run be a great thing.
Things do happen for a reason...perhaps in the cosmic scheme of things this will move the ball forward on alternative fuels. But in the meanwhile.....
I live close to the gulf coast...my family lives ON the gulf coast. I am biased...I admit it.
But I also am reasonable. And so are a majority of people on the gulf coast. As a matter of fact--in the beginning since many gulf coast residents worked on the rigs, you may be surprised to hear that some in those areas were pro BP. We all need oil and many in this economy needs jobs...so why would the regional residents be upset by job opportunity.
I do hear a lot of coastal residents say they can forgive a horrible tragic one and a million accident. What they yare having trouble understanding is how BP's group think (at least as it is being promoted) seems so short sighted, almost selfish. When you look at the science behind the spewing oil pipe....they say it is like fixing a leak on the moon. I don't know why this wasn't thought about years ago...but that is for another post. I will take for granted that this is a really hard problem to solve. And right now, worrying about what should have been is wasteful, costly and pointless to those on the coast.
However, now that the reality of the spill is known...why on earth are we not using the thousands of residents on the coast to at least try to clean. Why? Why? From an HR perspective it seems so wasteful.
But I have learned one thing in HR---don't make an opinion until you have all the facts. And I cearly don't. There is my disclaimer.
I leave this with some good news. I do have people extremely close to me who have been working for the Gov't in the Mobile Command Center. They say every one in that command center is passionate for a solve and are working round the clock to figure this solve.
That's the only thing I can hang my hat on right now.
As for Tony Hayward......the scrunchy face I can take....it's the words that need to stop. Particularly if they are not true or not sincere.
Post a Comment