There is an old joke about the life cycle of projects. They go through six stages:
Enthusiasm
Disillusionment
Panic
A Search for the Guilty
The Punishment of the Innocent
Praise and Honour for the Non-Participants.
I think various bits of each stage get mixed up. We have seen a bit of all of these. But there is much more to come. A few observations below:
Firstly, I think the two that have left are sacrificial lambs. I don't know them, I don't work for BA. I saw a picture of Mr. Kirkwood on Pprune, and my immediate thought was "this guy is way too young to have the life experiences (especially of failure) necessary to do that job". I've still got the scars from learning what "sending a boy to do a man's job" actually means.
T5:
One reason that they could have gone is that they knew about the T5 problems before it opened and failed to pass it upwards, or that they didn't know as it had been kept quiet from those below, but they are the public hangings
As for either of these people telling (warning) their boss that there were problems that needed to be attended to, that is impossible. All I can say is that if you try and tell a narcissist that their plans are flawed you will earn their undying hatred and be sacked as soon as it is convenient - I've seen it happen. I would also expect that Mr. Walsh sends out very strong signals about what he wants to hear and doesn't want to hear. That of course assumes that the Gentlemen concerned had the experience necessary to know that there were problems.
Direct reporting to Mr. Walsh
That tells me three things.
1. The managers were fired, not for bad planning, etc., but because they couldn't make T5 work as advertised right now.
2. Mr. Walsh has yet to panic. He does not yet know enough to panic.
3. I fail to understand how direct reporting to Mr. Walsh is going to do much to solve the problem. I expect that the poor schmucks who are the deputy managers will spend half their day writing daily progress reports and the other half on Mr. Walsh's carpet being berated.
Appointment of a Chief Operations Officer
Mr. Walsh will no doubt think that this is a blessing, since in theory it insulates him from any operational responsibility and of course, the T5 fiasco.
If I was Mr. Walsh, I would be rather worried, since my guess is that the COO is going to replace Mr. Walsh as CEO, perhaps rather quickly, once they have their feet under the table and can demonstrate performance and impress the Board by doing something about T5.
If Mr. Walsh is very lucky this might happen by giving him a seat on the Board, but I doubt it.
As for the COO him(her)self, that appointment is going to be one that is often advertised under the byline "Make your Mark" and the blurb describes the job as "challenging". The phrase "cleaning the Augean stables" comes to mind. I don't think I'll apply.
However, we are not yet at the stage of "full blown panic" over T5. Mr. Walsh does not yet realise that the problems of T5 are likely systemic, at which time new consultants will be employed. It is only when their report is received and the scale of the mess becomes clear, that the Board will panic and Mr. Walsh will leave.
Praise and Honour for the Non-Participants.
When it becomes clear that the T5 debacle has the ability to negatively affect the Olympics, I suspect that a certain Chairman will receive a peerage and depart for greener fields, to be replaced by someone to preside over a "business transformation program" (with lots of money for the consultants) to clean up the mess. Yes, BA is a private company, but it's not that "Private" if you know what I mean.
Dozywannabe:
Of course in today's climate where a CEO will refuse to sign on unless they have ****-up insurance in the form of a golden parachute such a thing would be impossible, but it's nice to dream.
I share all your Pollyanna-ish sentiments expressed in your post except this one. Yes management should be leading by example from the top down and truth and honesty should be the coin of your corporate culture.
However.....Let me say that nobody is going to take on the thankless task of running and fixing BA without a golden parachute and spectacular annual emoluments for a number of reasons.
(a) The job is 24/7. You are investing all your energy in such a project. People who can successfully do this stuff do not grow on trees, nor can any "wannabe" walk off the street and do it.
(b) Success is not certain, even if you are highly competent and make zero mistakes. At some point, whether you succeed or fail, the Board will tell you to leave. You face public humiliation if you fail.
(c) If I work my @rse off, as a result making billions of dollars for the shareholders, then I expect some of it to attach itself to my sticky fingers. It's only fair.
(d) If you want me to work my @rse off, then it's better that I'm not worrying about my mortgage or school fees isn't it? (Same applies to pilots)