Geheimnisvoller Rücktritt von BP-Chef Bernard Looney: Was wir darüber wissen

Bernard Looney, aged 53, abruptly resigns as the CEO of BP, one of the largest corporations with approximately 67,000 employees and a revenue of $241 billion. Such an immediate departure from a prominent position raises questions about the reasons behind it. However, there is limited information available regarding this particular case.

What did the corporation communicate?

In der Pressemitteilung von BP  steht, Looney selbst habe dem Konzern seinen Rücktritt mitgeteilt, nachdem er akzeptiert habe, bei bestimmten Angaben nicht ausreichend transparent gegenüber BP gewesen zu sein. Dabei gehe es um persönliche Beziehungen Looneys im Kollegenkreis. Deutlicher wird die Mitteilung in diesem Punkt nicht.

It is reported that there were initial allegations in this direction in May of last year, which the company investigated. These allegations are said to have originated from an anonymous tip. However, the investigation found no evidence of violations of conduct rules. Looney provided a statement on BP’s request regarding the disclosure of past relationships and his commitment to future compliance.

Recently, there have been new indications that an external legal counsel has been brought in to investigate the allegations. This process is still ongoing and is not concluded with Looney’s resignation.

Looney habe nun erklärt, dass er bei seinen bisherigen Offenlegungen nicht »nicht vollständig transparent« gewesen sei. Er erkenne an, dass er BP hätte weitreichender informieren müssen.

Könnte jemand das bitte übersetzen?

Das liest sich alles sehr wolkig. Konkret könnte es offenbar um Affären gehen. Allerdings: Solange man dazu keine persönliche Stellungnahme Looneys hat, ist selbst das nicht sicher. Looney war für Anfragen des SPIEGEL nicht erreichbar, auch BP hat eine 24-stündige Frist zur Beantwortung von Nachfragen ungenutzt verstreichen lassen.

Regarding the topic of affairs, it is important to note that in many Anglo-Saxon influenced corporations, the rules are very strict. Specifically, the management personnel are often contractually obligated to refrain from engaging in or allowing any sexual relationships with colleagues in the present or future. If such relationships do occur, the employer must be informed. These clauses may also aim to exclude relationships that have existed in the past.

The companies aim to protect themselves against cases of abuse of power in this way. It usually does not matter whether the relationships are described as consensual. Often, this is difficult to verify for outsiders, and court proceedings in such cases quickly turn into mudslinging. Corporations want to avoid this. The #MeToo movement has certainly made companies more sensitive to this issue, although such cases were problematic before.

From the BP statement, it can be inferred that Looney has violated the company’s information obligations by having workplace relationships, according to BP’s representation. However, there is no confirmed information about the circumstances surrounding this. And because the rules in such corporations are so strict, it is not possible to draw any conclusions about the possible nature of the relationships based on this knowledge.

The British newspaper „Guardian“ states that in the near future, certain details will definitely come to light. They claim to have sources who are not surprised by the accusations. However, no information from the investigations mentioned by BP in May of last year has been leaked to the media. Even the British tabloids have not reported anything on this matter.

Gibt es ähnliche Beispiele in anderen Unternehmen?

Schon öfter wurden Beziehungen in der Firma zum Karrierekiller für prominente Manager. Das klassische Beispiel ist McDonald’s. 2019 feuerte der Fastfood-Konzern seinen Vorstandschef Steve Easterbrook, weil dieser »eine einvernehmliche Beziehung mit einer Angestellten« hatte. Der frühere Vorstandschef von Intel, Brian Krzanich, trat 2018 zurück, nachdem das Unternehmen herausgefunden hatte, dass er »eine frühere Beziehung mit einer Intel-Angestellten« hatte.

Wird das in Deutschland auch so streng gehandhabt?

Overall, the rules for good corporate governance in Germany are not as strict as in the United States. Freedom and personal rights also matter for executives. However, with the #MeToo movement, questions about possible abuse of power are being raised more frequently than before. Many German companies now include in their own corporate governance rules the exclusion of relationships with direct subordinates or their family members.

Sind in Deutschland Beispiele vorhanden?

Yes, but usually not with such radical consequences. For example, when it became known at the car manufacturer Daimler that the former head of personnel, Wilfried Porth, was in a relationship with the digital manager Sabine Scheunert – who was his superior. Dieter Zetsche, the CEO at the time, took over parts of Porth’s responsibilities, and the couple remained in the company. Porth left in 2021 after twelve years on the board, while Scheunert left in April of this year. The couple is now married. There have recently been rumors about romantic relationships between board members and subordinates at some other DAX companies, but without any consequences.

The former editor-in-chief of the „Bild“ newspaper, Julian Reichelt, also lost his position due to alleged misconduct towards interns, trainees, and employees – he has consistently denied the accusations. However, it appears that the evaluation of the case by the management of Springer Publishing was also influenced by the fact that Springer is currently expanding its business in the US and is being measured against the standards there.

Could Looney’s resignation be related to his performance?

There is no mention of this in the company’s announcement, the specific trigger is the investigation into his relationships. However, it is possible that parts of the board of directors – who are responsible for deciding on the appointment of the CEO – were not satisfied with Looney recently: BP’s profit dropped by 70 percent in the previous quarter; nevertheless, the dividend for shareholders was increased. Looney also faced criticism for his own salary of twelve million pounds. Above all, his strategy to make the oil and gas company BP environmentally friendly and invest in renewable energy was controversial.