Thread regarding ExxonMobil Corp. layoffs

Ranking is just a tool used by EM Management to promote chosen persons despite their performance and to exit certain persons despite their performance.

All the persons outside of those two categories fight over the middle. There is some actual consideration of performance for persons in the middle, but mostly a popularity contest dominated by persons awarded the higher profile assignments.

If assessments were absolutely based on performance, almost all NSI would be in BTC.

BTC produces so many deliverables that require rework and it seems that EM is focusing almost all PIP % on the people making the corrections.

Never ever believe that ranking is based on performance.

Honestly as a supervisor I saw the forced PDS distribution work both ways for/against minorities.
Yes it enabled a few to get a leg up on the “bubble” to the next rank category. But also more than once I saw where a minority was begging for a move and the dept head would not release them to another group because they were high-performing and it would skew our distribution, making it look like we had all lower-ranking minorities. So in a way I felt the forced-distribution sc--wed them to being trapped as token minorities and held out of promotions.

Anyone else sick of hearing the whining about minorities etc not being treated fairly? So ignorant that it is even mentioned because if the whiners believe everyone is created EQUAL then they wouldn't be whining about inequities! Just stop it and do your job! If you do this the nonsense lies will calm down. Just because someone is a minority it doesn't make them a good or even decent employee.

Bwashhasa. Most are taught entitlement through their school years and are d-mber than bricks. They show up looking for a fast track and it ain't happening. Guess, what Don Imus people, it'll get worse for y'all before it gets better. Bwashhasa

If Safety Department is only allowed to average RG40, seems like Safety is not the most important issue at EM.

@2ibq+1st8ycwj I would think it’s fairly obvious why there are not a large number of minorities in the most senior level positions purely based on demographics.

Two separate issues.

1. HiPos moved to highest ranking to support their predetermined career projection.

2. Minorities moved around rank group below HiPo level to meet target distributions.

There are other factors of unfairness such as Development Planning gets to average RG60 and Safety gets to average RG40.

Basically forced ranking is a poor way to treat employees that are supposed to work together seemlessly.

The ignorance and racial animus in this thread crystallizes perfectly the environment at EM. The ranking process, in the base case, is not a meritocracy. But, when it comes to minorities, it’s somehow given the credence of being a fair system except for “all the minorities being moved up unfairly.”

Where are these departments that move minorities up in rankings? Are they located on earth? Why haven’t these move ups resulted in more representation at the managerial or executive level?

Black jellybeans, anyone?

Story time: There was an employee forum some years ago where someone was asked why his leadership team was not diverse. He responded by saying “Well, these are hard jobs.”

That is the mindset that’s in ranking sessions throughout this company and EM should want to proactively mitigate this. It does not. So instead, they might play with the optics to avoid potential lawsuits. Let go of your grievance and realize Minorities are not sc…ing you over. Have you looked around this mf lately?

How is it legal to move persons up or down on a performance ranking list based on race and gender?

Seems illegal no matter which race or which gender or which direction moved.

@1qdp+1st8ycwj
I think the question should be ...how it is that most of the minorities end up at the bottom of the rank list in the first place?

Could it be the subjective nature of the process? Think about who is doing the ranking?... Could it be that there is some bias in the process that makes all the minorities end up at the bottom in the first place? .... But this thread is not ready for that conversation

Someone once said "When You're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression" ... But it's not. What you might be feeling is just the discomfort of losing a little bit of your privilege.

As @1kfv+1st8ycwj shared, look who's making all the decisions. I don't see minorities in key leadership making all these strategic changes that people are unhappy with

It seems illegal manipulation, but I have heard it mentioned at the end of a ranking session that results are not final until “checked” by HR for “fairness” to minorities.

The HR rep seemed to indicate that this was a legal requirement and that the government had requirements for target distributions.

If you are in HR or Law and know how and why this redistribution is required, please tell us.

@1qdp. That is definitely true. I wonder when we'll be allowed to talk about that?

After the ranking session that puts minorities all at the bottom, HR, with endorsement from Law, distribute the minorities throughout the rank list.

HR told me that all rankings were analyzed for the various minorities and the redistribution of those minorities were EM’s effort to avoid potential lawsuits from too many minorities at the bottom of this ranking.

As someone who’s been a supervisor, minorities are not distributed throughout ranking. Many end up in the bottom because they are perceived as lower performers.

All the replies defending the system and saying how its not rigged are ignoring facts. Look around and note how the vast majority of promotions into management are skewed towards minorities. Its almost impossible to be early career and have a chance as a white guy.

i am amazed with some of the posts that repeat the same point starting, from a true observation, exaggerating out of proportion and then mixing it with science fiction.

EM ranking was never a meritocracy. Legacies had always a good spot, American WASPs and British accent people were always promoted, a favor that in the last two decades was extended to certain women and, finally, actual work counted always less than the appearance/presentation of work.

Simply we had a higher ratio of contributors to managers that it didn’t matter. There was room to give a sense of meritocracy for the not so top rankings. Now we have too many managers and “roles” who have to be squeezed at the top that everybody else is pushed down and the consequences of the system are obvious to everyone.

Not all women have it easy either. It is a certain type that benefits. Look around you and you will see the ones left behind because they did not gave their lives to emulate the good old boys of Texas/UK.

It is true that some minorities are pushed up in the ranking. This really happens again at the lower levels because indeed, minorities appear to hit a ceiling at the division manager level. Again look around you and do some quick statistics. CareerConnect is open to everyone to see how many African American faces are there at the top.

EM management never wants to fix the problem, only the numbers. So their solution has been to hire any minority they can find (because the good ones know to avoid EM), then promote them early to make the numbers look good, only to abandon them when they start moving to higher positions.

EM is not a “woke” corporation that the OP implies. It is an organization that simply plays the numbers.

Nobody claimed that minorities are shoved into the top of the rank list. They are moved upward to achieve the target distribution but the top of each rank group is reserved for HiPos so they can achieve the CL progress curve that was mapped out for them.

HiPos are chosen very early and their trajectory is mapped out in varied positions and amazing rate of CL increases. The main flaw in this system is that HiPos are chosen so early, by people not directly familiar with each HiPo person, that often id--ts are chosen. After an id--t is chosen as a HiPo, it starts to believe the choice was based on it’s capability, and become unbearably arrogant. Despite the idiocy and arrogance, the HiPo continues upward because the Execs refuse to admit their poor choices. The arrogant id--ts continue upward with increasing responsibilities and do more damage, but the damage is covered up and the arrogant id--t stays at the top of the rank list.

Basically the HiPo system needs off-ramps to filter out arrogant id--ts.

This must be propaganda from corporate to sow discord on this website. Every quarter or so there’s some rant about how minorities are the problem for this or that. The all white male, republican voting, state school educated engineers corporate execs are the ones firing you, PIPing you, offshoring you, and underpaying you. After all this you’re telling me the reason the PADP system isn’t a meritocracy is because of minorities? We deserve to get sc--wed. If this is the level of understanding the average XOM has about the world then we deserve to have every single job sent to BTC. What a clown

If this claim is true....for all the under represented minorities that are "shoved into the top of the rank list"...can you please show me the evidence of how it 'worked out' for them.

Please count for me the numbers of minorities you see in the corporate leadership team? How many are Presidents ? VPs - You can count those in less than 2 fingers across the whole company... and so on and so forth down the organization.

For a massive company that has now been recruiting minorities for 40+ years at availability rate... The assessment process must really be working out for minorities since they are SO WELL represented in leadership

...maybe check your bias first

It's called oligarchy....look it up.

Never has been a meritocracy. We're just so much smaller now that the corrupt system is more obvious.

@rpm+1st8ycwj - yes I've seen it

Minorities are not at the bottom. They are typically throughout the ranking, but an HR Manager explained to me that there is a specific distribution target that EM forcibly attains after the ranking sessions. If the distribution does not match EM’s predefined distribution targets, then minorities are moved upward to achieve the distribution desired.

This changing of ranking based on race seems illegal, but the HR Manager said that EM legally had to achieve the pre-defined targets of distribution by labor laws, but did not explain.

If anyone know why EM sets distribution targets for minorities and how it is legal to change someone’s ranking based on their race, please explain.

Who you calling bro, bro? Where is this HR data showing minorities are at the bottom? You just made that up.

They never were, it’s just been made more visible in recent years

OP what's your point? Nobody gives a shlt anymore. Darren's strategy's clear to all. If you're still working for Exxon you're a mo--n or you're there for the money. PERIOD. Nobody cares about the share price unless you're shorting it. We all know this company's going to the trash in a hurry. Expertise is mostly gone by now. Moral's dead. And the future's been trashed for short term profits to make the investors happy. Get it in your head: NOBODY CARES.

I love these "old white man" rant. Must be so nice to justify the own deficiencies with the race / gender card..... #loser

Bro - there's what you feel - maybe even if an anecdote here and there...and there's real aggregated HR data that shows minorities are more often in the bottom of the assessment buckets

Where have you been? It hasn't been meritocracy for last 3 years. Company try to get rid of people. Many worker bees got executed because they didn't do a good job of licking their managers boot.
XOM managers are overpowered last few years. Hope there is a round of elimination just for managers