Thread regarding ExxonMobil Corp. layoffs

How to reverse Exxonmobil effect?

I am the manager of three former ExxonMobil employees:

The first is desperate to please me and shows strong “boss-pleasing” behavior. It’s frustrating because I need him focused on productivity, not on feeding my ego. His results are what matter.

The second reacted strongly when I asked for help moving a table, saying it was a safety risk and refusing to do it.

The third seems to be living in the past. I hear “when I was at ExxonMobil…” at least five times a day.

I’ve started to notice a pattern. Former ExxonMobil employees often seem like they’ve gone through some kind of conditioning and struggle to behave normally in a different environment.

I don’t know what the company is doing to its employees, but it feels intense. They all come across as somewhat distressed, almost like they’ve developed an obsessive or overly rigid mindset.

I’m not sure what to do. They seem like capable employees, but their behavior is unusual, and I don’t want to fire them.

Any ideas on how to “reverse” the ExxonMobil effect?

P.S. They all say they left due to strategic changes, like departments being moved to other countries, not because of performance issues.


by
| 55 views | | 18 replies (last April 16) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1kp6a7njw

18 replies (most recent on top)

@g6 If ExxonMobil offered you a strong salary package, wouldn’t you at least consider joining, even knowing there’s a chance it might cost you a bit of your sanity?

The truth is, we tend to assume we’ll be the exception. We watch what happens to others and quietly believe it won’t happen to us. That mindset alone explains why so many people stay. The company’s culture is widely seen as toxic, yet it continues to retain talent because the compensation, pension, benefits, and the status of being associated with ExxonMobil are hard to walk away from.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @hx+1kp6a7njw

If ExxonMobil offered you a strong salary package, wouldn’t you at least consider joining, even knowing there’s a chance it might cost you a bit of your sanity?

The truth is, we tend to assume we’ll be the exception. We watch what happens to others and quietly believe it won’t happen to us. That mindset alone explains why so many people stay. The company’s culture is widely seen as toxic, yet it continues to retain talent because the compensation, pension, benefits, and the status of being associated with ExxonMobil are hard to walk away from.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @hw+1kp6a7njw

The company’s internal culture has long had culty characteristics: “We Are ExxonMobil ” and a reward system that elevates enforcers over experts. EM cultivates a belief that its methods are uniquely superior

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @h6+1kp6a7njw

@g0 oh okay, so BEFORE you joined XOM you thought the employees were crazy so then you decided to join the "Crazy" company those employees left? Bro, make it make sense. So yeah, never happened.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @g6+1kp6a7njw

I was the original poster. Before I joined ExxonMobil, I was managing three former ExxonMobil employees. Today, I work inside the company. And I reflect a lot about it, reason why I posted to see how people react.

Everything I described was real. What changed was my perspective.

Back then, I saw dysfunctional behavior. Now I see adaptation to a very specific system.

The original post reflects how I reacted as a manager. The reply explaining the behaviors is also from me and reflects what I wish I had understood then.

They were not irrational. They were adapted.

“Those who were dancing were judged as crazy by those who could not hear the music.”

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @g0+1kp6a7njw

@fh agree. @op was likely PIPed

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @fv+1kp6a7njw

@bg Frankly I don’t assume anything the original poster said is real. Very odd for someone to come to an ExxonMobil layoff site for advice. Sounds like the poster is just trying to poke fun at the bad behaviors of certain ExxonMobil employees.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @fh+1kp6a7njw

@bg
from a former employee : this analysis is so true. After I left I realized the company's culture fits many of the characteristics one would find in a sect ... a blind adoration and mindless following of a great leader without daring to question it; mindless following of a number of random internal rules that make absolutely no sense in the outside world but even questioning them is frowned upon; handling of individual employees as if they are toddlers that don't need to think or question ... am glad I am out of there.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @eh+1kp6a7njw

@ac why are you shouting just like your clown in chief

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @eg+1kp6a7njw

@bg well said. As an experienced hire, I had a hard time trying to assimilate into EM culture. It was super "odd" especially with the risk adverse culture. But years later, I realised I have slowly adapted and "changed" my behaviour in order to "survive" internally. What worries me is that I may have to undergo another round of adaptation to the outside world the day I leave EM. The struggle I have this time maybe I may not be able to tell what constitutes "normal" in the outside world.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @c1+1kp6a7njw

I worked for other companies before joining ExxonMobil, and yes, Exxon has processes I had never seen anywhere else. I can clearly recognize the patterns you described, so let’s go case by case.

The first one, the boss pleasing behavior. At Exxon, employees are required to document their achievements and rely on their manager to defend them in calibration sessions against a large group competing for limited rankings. This creates a system where performance alone is not enough, and survival depends heavily on how well your manager advocates for you. The result is predictable. People learn very quickly that managing the manager matters as much as, or more than, delivering results.

What you are seeing is not personality, it is conditioning. The employee is trying to play a game that no longer exists. When you reject that dynamic and focus on results, it creates confusion and insecurity, so the behavior intensifies. The person is not trying to manipulate you, they are trying to survive a system that trained them to think this way. The way out is simple but uncomfortable. Stop rewarding the behavior, make expectations explicit, and consistently reinforce that results matter more than politics.

The second case is a classic safety culture side effect. There were periods at Exxon where safety metrics were tied to recognition and rewards, sometimes in a very visible way. Over time, that can shift behavior from genuine safety awareness to fear driven reactions. People become more afraid of the consequence of an incident than focused on handling it rationally.

So when someone refuses to move a table, it is not about the table. It is about years of being trained that any small action can escalate into a recordable event with consequences. You are not dealing with common sense, you are dealing with risk aversion at an extreme level. The fix is reassurance combined with clarity. Safety matters, but fear is not the operating model.

The third one is the hardest. Exxon is one of the largest companies in the world and historically provided a level of structure, benefits, and identity that many people internalize deeply. When they leave, they do not just lose a job, they lose a reference point. Repeating “when I was at Exxon” is often less about arrogance and more about attachment. Over time, reality replaces nostalgia.

Now the most interesting part is not even the employees. It is the reaction you received. You shared a real situation and asked for input, and people jumped to call you incompetent, told you to put employees on PIP, dismissed your concerns, and labeled people as losers and clowns. That response alone explains more about the culture than any internal document ever could.

If anything, your team is not the problem. They are the output of a system that optimizes for internal competition, dependency on hierarchy, and fear based controls.

The fact that you are trying to understand and not simply punish already puts you in a completely different category of leadership. In environments like Exxon, that kind of reflection is rare. Most managers would simply reinforce the system, not question it.

You are not dealing with difficult people. You are dealing with people recovering from a very specific kind of corporate conditioning.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bg+1kp6a7njw

PIP these clowns out. They love the anxiety it creates…

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @b1+1kp6a7njw

This is easy- you have a meeting and be "the manager"- it goes like this--"this is not Exxonmobil..." and proceed to say why. Exxon breeds an obedience culture and not many will ever challenge anything that is put in front of them. This is the reason that change management is not really needed at this company, because everyone does what they are told.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ae+1kp6a7njw

Sounds like you sc--wed up and hired losers...You should be fired because you are incompetent. Many former employees are not good...BUT the vast majority of former XOM are AMONG the BEST in the INDUSTRY. If you cannot judge quality, your are the INCOMPETENT ONE

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ac+1kp6a7njw

Yeah, never happened

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ab+1kp6a7njw

That was fun

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a5+1kp6a7njw

First option: never hire an XOM employee
Second option: put the former XOM employee on a PIP. They will know exactly what to do.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a4+1kp6a7njw

Post a reply

: