Six months ago Albert Manifold played a critical role in convincing Meg O’Neill to become the next chief executive of BP, a position that had come to be viewed as a poisoned chalice in the industry after two departures in three years.
This week the board on which O’Neill now sits ousted the Irish businessman as chair, with the company saying there had been “serious concerns” about his behaviour. People familiar with the matter claimed there were “multiple” whistleblower complaints about alleged “bullying”.
Manifold told the FT the decision to remove him came “out of the blue” and he added via a spokesperson that he would contest the claims about his alleged behaviour, saying he had worked to “drive genuine change at BP – cutting costs, challenging excess, and holding the organisation to higher standards.
“I dispute entirely the characterisation of my conduct and I will not allow a false narrative to go unchallenged,” he added.
RM Block
To critics Manifold’s ousting is a sign that BP has become almost ungovernable, having now replaced two CEOs and two chairs in the past three years after a mismanaged pivot towards renewable energy left it lagging its competitors. Its shares, which had risen faster than Shell this year on hopes of a turnaround, fell 4 per cent on Tuesday.
[ Business Who is Albert Manifold and why has he been removed as chairman of BP?Opens in new window ]
“This just creates another ridiculous level of uncertainty at a time when radical restructuring is called for,” said analyst Paul Sankey, founder of Sankey Research.
Others hope it is a sign that O’Neill might be getting a grip of a company that had threatened to become a takeover target, even if they accept that Manifold played an important role in fostering the turnaround that has helped BP’s shares rise more than 20 per cent since he joined in September.
When Manifold, the former chief executive of Irish building supplies group CRH, replaced outgoing chair Helge Lund, one person involved in the search process said that his low profile and lack of oil and gas experience were not an issue.
“A chair is not meant to be the high-profile person. The CEO is the leader of the business,” the person said.
Just months later people familiar with the matter described tensions between Manifold and BP’s board and O’Neill, with the chair allegedly overstepping his role and at times acting like an executive tasked with the day-to-day running of the company.
They accused him of a habit of talking down to employees at all levels and a “shouty” management style that was at odds with BP’s culture.
One of the people said many colleagues – junior and senior – found Manifold “impossible to work with” as he “wanted to control everything”, adding: “You can’t operate like that anymore.”
Two people said Manifold had also used personal accounts or devices for carrying out company business, in breach of BP’s policies.
A person close to Manifold disputed this claim, saying the company had willingly sent emails to Manifold’s personal email. Manifold was not aware of any whistleblower complaints before his dismissal and so had zero chance to respond, the person added.
O’Neill, whose no-nonsense reputation has helped her become the most senior woman in the energy industry and the first to run an oil major, is a member of the board which BP said made a “unanimous” decision to remove him rather than risk her authority being undermined.
Since starting in April she has already moved quickly by splitting BP into two main business units in a return to its traditional oil and gas structure before it attempted to transform into an energy transition leader under Bernard Looney.
The move to make BP greener was reversed by his successor Murray Auchincloss, who left last December after pressure from activist investor Elliott Management to accelerate the strategic overhaul and arrest the company’s poor financial performance.
Manifold’s departure will boost O’Neill’s power in the company, but may also leave her exposed as the sole person responsible in investors’ eyes for quickly delivering a turnaround.
She must also hold together a company that has been rocked by multiple senior departures in the past three years.
UBS analyst Joshua Stone said that while the manner of Manifold’s departure may initially weigh on BP’s share price, investors would be reassured by O’Neill’s presence, saying she had joined at a “critical turning point and can help reverse these years of weakness”.
BP has faced turmoil ever since Looney left in 2023 over his failure to disclose the full extent of his relationships with BP employees during his appointment process. His bold pivot towards renewables, which had alienated many investors, quickly unravelled.
Manifold’s departure will undoubtedly stoke renewed questions over the BP board’s decision-making, but some see O’Neill and a new chair – to be appointed later this year – as a chance for a fresh start.
“The problems at BP are rooted in the weakness of the board,” said one former BP executive.
The executive, who did not want to be named, said a new chair should be empowered to rebuild the board with professionals who know their role is to advise and oversee rather than try to run the company from the boardroom.
“Meg O’Neill and the entire team at BP deserve better,” said the executive.
Henry Tarr, co-head of energy and environment research at Berenberg, said most investors had backed Manifold’s vision for the company.
“There will be questions again as to whether that changes the strategic direction or the urgency with which the company will pursue its goals. The release seems to suggest that they’re very much sticking with Meg,” he said.
Interim chair Ian Tyler said BP’s board and executives still “have deep conviction in the strategic direction we have laid out”.
People close to BP told the FT the company is bracing for potential legal action by the ousted chair.
While BP’s board felt it had no choice but to remove Manifold, Sankey warned this was not guaranteed to deliver success in the eyes of international investors concerned about the group’s share price.
“To bring about change you need leaders to upset people and the constant leadership changes will make US investors question whether they really need to own BP stock.” – Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2026
