Sacrifice the CEO

After our discussion in class about whether or not BP's CEO should step down, I started researching other companies who have chosen that route to weather a crisis. At the end of 2009, Bank of America lost its CEO, Kenneth Lewis, in the midst of their costly Merrill Lynch merger, government bailout, and SEC investigation. The Board of Directors was accused of lying to shareholders about the extent of the financial losses that would accompany acquiring Merrill Lynch. Shareholder trust was lost and government influence and involvement was strong. It has been speculated that government officials threatened Lewis and forced him to go through with the merger despite knowing full well that billions of dollars in losses that would come with it. The controvery surrounding the deal was a crisis for Bank of America with most of the heat falling and centered around Lewis. In late September 2009, Lewis announced that he would resign at the end of the year.
I found an interesting article in the Wall Street Journal's Opinion Journal titled "The Fall Guy", which basically claims that by resigning, Lewis became a scapegoat not only for Bank of America's crisis but the nationwide economic crisis as a whole. It depicts him as the government's sacrifcial lamb. Was this fair to Lewis? Is it an accurate depiction? Was it all part of the government's master plan? Did it work? If so, would it work for BP?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704471504574447171063275730.html