British chief executives could learn a thing or two from their US counterparts.

British chief executives could learn a thing or two from their US counterparts.

Whether or not they have superior business skills, American CEOs tend to be immeasurably better at playing the part of the head honcho. While British chief execs can be engaging and articulate, their peers across the Atlantic radiate charisma, belief in what they’re doing, and sheer enjoyment of their role. It’s like comparing David Cameron with Barack Obama.

I can’t help but feel that BP chief executive Tony Hayward’s failure to win hearts and minds in the US is partly down to a mismatch of expectations about what a CEO should be. Of course, there’s also the question of the weekend boating excursion, but even before that, everyone was agreed that Hayward’s performance had fallen desperately short of what the American press and public expect.

Unlike many US newspapers, I don’t believe Hayward is particularly arrogant or out of touch, at least no more so than the average big company boss. He just doesn’t hit the right note. His attempts at empathy ring hollow, his discomfort is obvious, and there is a lack of conviction about his apologies. What matters in these sort of situations is not sincerity, but the appearance of it, and to American ears in particular, Hayward just doesn’t come across as sufficiently concerned about an oil spill which is threatening their livelihoods.

Of course, this sort of public performance is only a part of what a CEO has to do, perhaps not the most important part. But in a chief exec’s arsenal of skills, it is a useful one to have, and no country can offer better models for it than the US.