Thread regarding Chevron Corp. layoffs

What was John Watson like as CEO?


by
| 2271 views | | 19 replies (last December 6) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1kbp4tgmc

19 replies (most recent on top)

Best way to summarize it: JW was better for employees while MW is better for shareholders

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @e9+1kbp4tgmc

Generally, the Board looks for a CEO candidate to be in the role for ten years for continuity. So, it would be someone currently in their early fifties.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @dx+1kbp4tgmc

Used to see him in building A cafeteria engaging with other employee. More approachable and won’t gaslight the entire payroll with a broad stroke.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @dv+1kbp4tgmc

JW wasn't anything great, but he was a lot better than the current CEO. It's kind of how Trump makes people miss the days of GWB's incompetency.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @dt+1kbp4tgmc

But ... Kirkland was the real deal — listened to the troops - a strong engineer who dove into the weeds, and used that depth to shape strategy. Now the board barely has the know how to focus on the outcomes nor the management the skills to set the means. e.g. AI “pipe dreams” exists because there’s a disconnect in understanding of what we produce, where we produce it, how it's produced. A surface level grasp exhibited by following Wall street and the Silicon Valley doesn't cut it. consequences of premature promotions and not listening to the employees.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ds+1kbp4tgmc

JW was engaging, likable guy. He did interface with employees (i remember him asking us how the cubicles were working in Bldg. V when walking the floor--- and he listened when we said the lack of confidentiality made it a non-starter).

Yes, he came from a Corporate staff perspective--- M&A/Business Development, Finance and Corporate Strategy but his decisions were weighted in reasoned "decision analysis" rationale.

It was a stable growth period during JW's tenure as CEO.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @d0+1kbp4tgmc

@aq Chevron continues to win from the Australian Gas Projects to this day. The long term contracts that were signed continue to drive Chevron's cash flow and allow MW and our illustrious BOD to spend the hard earned proceeds on share buybacks and dividends, avoiding hard decisions like those involving capital allocation and future growth.

Just because CAPEX was underestimated on a project(s) and we overspent does not mean the investment is a disaster. These investments are 30 year investments and the cost of energy is going up and up and up......

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cj+1kbp4tgmc

Didn’t he shoot an eagle on the 18th at Pebble Beach the day a re-org and layoffs were announced?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cc+1kbp4tgmc

I liked him. He treated employees well, was present - came to events and interfaced with employees, had a coherent growth strategy and kept good people around him. Wish he was still around.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cb+1kbp4tgmc

JW was the formal acknowledgement that the corporation really had not prepared any leaders for the job. GK was huge but only liked upstream. Robertson was great but too old. There really was nobody else besides JW and he was good at finance but that was the only job he did his entire career except for some short training/development stints. Finance only gets you so far - it's just bean counting. He was pushed out prematurely and PB was passed over as he was also strictly a finance guy. MW is far from ideal but we again have nobody ready so until EB is fully versed in finance, we can't move forward. She will be good but I have a feeling she will only last 3-4 years. Then we are going to have someone really young and dynamic changing the company radically.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @c3+1kbp4tgmc

No Kirkland No Gorgon no Wheatstone, Much less deep water GOM, MCBU minerals would have been sold, Chesapeake wouldnt have been added to the Permian portfolio, Africa would be done. Say what you like but he has been a giant in our history and without him we would be struggling to be in business. JW was just background

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bp+1kbp4tgmc

@aq wasn’t that Kirkland?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @b2+1kbp4tgmc

JW was an id--t. Truly.

MW is not an id--t, he's just self serving.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @as+1kbp4tgmc

JW gambled on large Australian LNG projects and lost. Too bad, but at least he had some sort of vision for growth and expansion. MW is strictly a cost-cutter who hopes retreating to the historic business of drilling wells will make Chevron prosperous in a low-carbon world. MW is by far the bigger loser, even if Chevron can still make the dividend for the time being.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @aq+1kbp4tgmc

Better than a man people now say when going to take s**t, Im taking an MW!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @af+1kbp4tgmc

They are all controlled

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a9+1kbp4tgmc

Better than MW, aka cryptkeeper
Looks like a corpse lately
Is he sick?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a6+1kbp4tgmc

Ineffective but nice … to look at 😂

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a5+1kbp4tgmc

He su-ked but still better than the current id--t.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a1+1kbp4tgmc

Post a reply

: