BP, or famously known as British Petroleum, has been in utter doldrums. In the last week of May 2026, the energy major’s chair, Albert Manifold, got removed by the company’s board over allegations and ‘concerns’ about his governance standards, oversight and conduct. The company has now asked its senior independent director Amanda Blanc to lead the search for the next chair, while Ian Tyler will be taking up Manifold’s responsibilities on an interim basis.
Blanc, also a CEO of British insurer Aviva, oversaw Manifold’s appointment at BP in October 2025. However, multiple figures from London’s financial centre, including large investors in the oil giant, told the Financial Times that this time around, Blanc would lack the support from shareholders to make a second appointment to the post.
Manifold’s inglorious exit has added another chapter in BP’s leadership instability. In 2023, former CEO Bernard Looney was fired after lying to the board about his personal relationships with colleagues. His successor, Murray Auchincloss, left abruptly in December 2025.
While former Woodside CEO Meg O’Neill joined the British energy major immediately, she also became the venture’s fifth CEO since 2020. Although her role has been to accelerate the company’s shift away from renewable energy to refocus on oil and gas, right now what BP needs is stability at the top, along with clear policy direction.
BP’s gas and low-carbon business chief William Lin will leave the organisation as well. However, as per the reports, this has to do with O’Neill’s reorganisation efforts that will turn the business into two main units of downstream and upstream, bundling oil and gas production, with the goal of making BP simpler and more valuable.
BP vs Manifold
The immediate reason behind Manifold’s removal was his alleged act of aggression with different colleagues across the BP. The board had reportedly received enough information following a whistleblower report to ascertain that there was a pattern of “unacceptable behaviour” from the chair.
Manifold, while interacting with Reuters, disputed the accusations and commented, “I was removed without warning and without explanation. I dispute entirely the characterisation of my conduct, and I will not allow a false narrative to go unchallenged.”
It is also worth remembering that Manifold had the backing of activist hedge fund Elliott, which has built up a stake of around 5% in BP. The chair’s role at BP was Manifold’s first-ever leadership job in the energy industry. Before joining the British giant, he was the chief at building materials producer CRH, where he helped the company to reshape its operational portfolio. He also helped the business to move its primary listing from Ireland to the United States, a move that helped CRH’s share prices to go up.
However, Manifold’s journey as BP’s chair was anything but smooth. Under his watch, BP’s board shrank. Shell finance chief Simon Henry, who only joined the company in September 2025, was among those quitting at short notice. The April 2026 annual general meeting (AGM) saw the board failing to get two of its resolutions accepted by shareholders, and Manifold’s appointment as chair got less support than typical.
Despite the board putting up a united show back then, proxy adviser Glass Lewis held Manifold accountable for BP’s decision to exclude a resolution filed by climate activist group Follow This and thus recommended a vote against him. His appointment, however, was confirmed by around 82% of votes, well below the typical near 100% tally for directors.
Another infamous chapter was Manifold’s alleged clash with Henry. As per the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), the issue was the fellow director’s handling of sensitive talks related to a potential deal. Manifold privately accused Henry of overstepping his authority and excluding other directors from communications, while Henry denied any mishandling of talks, arguing that Manifold was mischaracterising conversations.
Hitting back to the WSJ, Manifold’s spokesperson said, “Assertions that he accused Mr Henry of overstepping his authority or excluding fellow board members from communications are false.”
Manifold, post his removal as the BP chair, said not everyone at the oil major shared his priorities to cut costs and boost efficiency, while acknowledging being too pushy for the change. However, he again denied committing any misconduct.
“Is it possible that in my determination to drive change on costs, performance, the balance sheet and shareholder communications, I pushed hard and challenged people directly? Yes, it is. What I do not accept is that lies can be told about me, nor that anyone should be allowed to hide behind anonymity when commenting on my time at BP,” he remarked.
Quoting BP’s internal sources, a Reuters report claimed that Manifold met with activist shareholder Elliott Management during his tenure without telling fellow board members directly. While these interactions were not technically a breach of any specific rule, they created an impression of him acting unilaterally, reportedly displeasing the board.
While Elliott wanted BP to cut costs, shift focus and spending from renewable projects to oil and gas and simplify its organisational structure, Manifold, on the other hand, wanted to accelerate the revamp. Most of the organisational changes got implemented in recent months.
Does BP have the most volatile boardroom?
As per Lindsey Stewart, director of institutional investor content at Morningstar, “At this point it’s fair to say BP has the most volatile boardroom of the oil supermajors. With a resurgent share price so far this year, BP should be taking credit for the rewards of its strategic reset. Instead, the company is on its third CEO and now its third chairman in under three years. It’s clear that getting a grip on corporate governance and strategy at the company must be a priority of the interim chair and his eventual successor.”
Legendary investment manager Neil Woodford, on the other hand, minced no words for BP. As per him, Manifold is the third chairman the company has been through in three years, and this sort of makes BP look “ungovernable”.
“Shareholders should look away from the churn at the top and instead at who is doing the churning,” Woodford remarked in a LinkedIn post, as he continued, “people should focus on the decisions made by non-executive directors rather than the chairman himself.”
“Most of the non-executive directors who pushed Manifold out have sat on that board throughout the entire period. The same people who have hired and fired chairmen and chief executives in quick succession remain comfortably in place. And the man they have just removed was the architect of BP’s turnaround strategy and the person who recruited the new chief executive in the first place. The board kept itself and discarded the one figure actually trying to change the business,” he concluded.