Albert Manifold, removed as BP chairman after only six months, has fired back at allegations of bullying and overbearing conduct, calling them 'lies' and accusing unnamed colleagues of hiding behind anonymity. The former chairman's statement, released after his abrupt dismissal on Tuesday, acknowlegdes he pushed hard for strategic changes but denies crossing the line. manifold has retained City law firm Mishcon de Reya, signaling a potential legal battle over the ouster.

The Six-Month Tenure That Ended in Anonymity

Manifold was appointed BP chairman in October as part of a broader shake-up that redirected the company's focus from renewable energy back to fossil fuels, according to the source article. He lasted just six months before the board removed him, citing 'serious concerns over his conduct.' In his statement, Manifold pointed out that during his entire tenure, no one raised any concerns directly with him , saying, 'Indeed, in my 40-year working career, I have never once had accusations made against me such as those made in recent days.' The source reports that colleagues described him as aggressive and shouty, but Manifold disputes this characterisation entirely.

BP's Strategic Pivot: From Renewable Energy Back to Fossil Fuels

The ouster comes at a critical juncture for BP, which is navigating a controversial strategic pivot to boost profits and share price by returning to fossil fuels. Manifold, reflecting on his short tenure, said he found a company that 'lacked strategic cohesion and direction' and questioned whether those issues could have impacted shareholder interests. the source article notes that Manifold was appointed as part of that shake-up, which shifted the company's priorities. This governance clash threatens to distract from BP's core business challenges, as the company tries to balance investor expectations with global energy transition pressures.

The 13-Day Claim: Manifold's Defense Against Executive Chairman Rumors

Manifold dismissed as 'nonsense' the suggestion that he intended to take on an executive chairman role, using a specific attendance figure to bolster his defense. According to the source, he stated, 'I know well the time commitment and effort it takes to be a senior executive in a public company, and one certainly cannot fulfil those executive duties by being in the office for 13 days in a five-month period.' This factual claim directly contradicts the board's apparent concerns and raises questions about whether the allegations were a pretext for a different disagreement over Manifold's vision for the company's direction.

Who Are the Unnamed Accusers and What Evidence Exists?

A central open question in this dispute is the identity and credibility of the colleagues who raised the bullying complaints. Manifold's statement explicitly attacks the process, accusing people of hiding behind anonymity and spreading 'lies.' The source article, citing the Financial Times, reports that Manifold was described as aggressive and shouty towards both junior and senior staff, but no named individuals have come forward. Without concrete evidence or named accusers, the dispute risks turning into a he-said, she-said conflict that could end up in court. Manifold has already hired Mishcon de Reya, a firm known for high-profile reputation management cases, suggesting he is prepared to take legal aciton to clear his name.