Thread regarding ExxonMobil Corp. layoffs

Lee Raymond’s Famous Quotes on Employee Performance at ExxonMobil - CoPIlot Search

Lee Raymond’s Famous Quotes on Employee Performance at ExxonMobil

Lee Raymond, CEO of ExxonMobil from 1999 to 2005, was known for his strong emphasis on merit-based systems, hard work, and the role of competition in driving performance. While he did not publish a single “employee performance” manifesto, several of his public statements reflect his philosophy on how people should be rewarded and motivated in business.

Key quotes related to performance and merit:

“The market system requires that people be committed and willing to work hard. Inherent with that is what I call a merit system, which I think gives people the greatest opportunity.”

This statement underscores his belief that performance should be tied to effort and results, with merit being the primary driver of advancement and rewards.

“The main professional responsibility of a person in business is business. He or she must be successful in economic terms, but always within an ethical framework.”

Raymond stressed that business success—measured by performance and profitability—is the core duty, with ethics as a guiding constraint weheartquotes.com.

“It is important to remember that all business has an impact on the lives of real people.”
This reflects his view that performance should be evaluated not just on numbers, but also on its tangible effects on people and communities weheartquotes.com.

“Ethical conduct is something that becomes inherent in an organization over a long period of time.”

While not directly about performance metrics, this implies that a culture of integrity supports sustainable, high-performing organizations weheartquotes.com.

Overall philosophy:

Raymond’s approach to employee performance was rooted in a meritocratic, results-oriented mindset. He believed that hard work, competition, and measurable success were the keys to both personal advancement and organizational success, while maintaining ethical standards as a foundation.

If you need a concise summary for a presentation or discussion, you could frame it as:

“At ExxonMobil, we reward those who are committed, willing to work hard, and deliver results—within an ethical framework. Merit, not favoritism, should be the standard for performance.”


by
| 5 views | | 16 replies (last 20 hours ago) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1ktspagjk

16 replies (most recent on top)

All said, I do miss the meritocracy. It was a glorious time to be young, ambitious, and hard working in a company that rewarded its people with career advancement and real projects for all who rose to the challenge. Rest in Peace Lee.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @k8+1ktspagjk

Actually, Raymond's biggest "culture change" was introduction of The Operations Integrity Management Framework (OIMF), after Valdez and after Piper Alpha and other industry disasters. This changed the way EVERYONE thought about Risk in the company. OIMS later became OIMS. In many cases it was overdone and became bureaucratic (and in need of critical review because the bureaucracy that built up over 20 years. But it clearly caused XOM to assess risk and consequence more systematically. We have not had a Macondo or Texas City or Bhopal. Hopefully cost reduction does not lead to one or these in the future.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @k0+1ktspagjk

"Under Raymond’s leadership, Exxon spent millions of dollars funding a shadowy network of think tanks and pseudo-scientific groups who published memos, briefings, and advertisements meant to cast doubt on climate change. As the journalist Steve Coll wrote in his book Private Empire,

Under Lee Raymond, ExxonMobil had persistently funded a public policy campaign in Washington and elsewhere that was transparently designed to raise public skepticism about the science that identified fossil fuels as a cause of global warming. ExxonMobil ran some aspects of its campaign clandestinely; that is, it did not initially disclose the full scope and purpose of contributions it made. […] What distinguished the corporation's activity during the late 1990s and the first Bush term was the way it crossed into disinformation."

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @jb+1ktspagjk

@cm Raymond was 100% an open book- people knew where they stood- he respected ethics and service.

Darren only cares about TSR and his record from 2020 shows employees and service are not the priority.

I’d rather have Raymond as my ceo today. Stocks performed and service was rewarded and recognized.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @fa+1ktspagjk

Having worked at other high profile companies as well as XOM, my observation is that that many managers who I had worked for do not exemplify integrity or ethical behaviors. They say all the right things and throw a lot of word like “best practices”, following “work processes”, and the latest catch phrases of the year. They are nothing more than manipulators looking out for their self interest. I have had been coerced to under report in my time sheet, asked to attribute credit to those who did not do the work, and endorse unsound technologies/ ideas. Many of the current manager do not look out for the interest of their people or the company or greater good. It’s a cut throat environment that if you are not in the club then you are just a stepping stone to someone’s next career move or fodder when you outlive your usefulness.

It’s a company with opportunities to do interest work. Unfortunately, people have to tolerate and survive through an extremely toxic work culture.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @f6+1ktspagjk

@cm " some employees still have integrity". Yes, and they are at the bottom of the rank groups.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @dj+1ktspagjk

He'll be dead, what does he care.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @d4+1ktspagjk

Woods is very similar to Raymond. Focus is the business and not employees. I don’t think many are upset that Raymond is gone from this world and likely the same will be said about Woods. Does Woods want his legacy to be similar to Raymond’s? I guess he has the ability to change that now if he so chooses.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cy+1ktspagjk

@cm
Very well said.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cv+1ktspagjk

How about tegridy ? Is it also gone?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cr+1ktspagjk

@aq Some employees still have integrity, especially with those older ones with whom that core value resonated. They are trying to hold on. The company does not have the same level of integrity it used to 20 years ago. Integrity (‘how’ we get results) used to be the corner stone of every interview, hard decision, and meeting mantra:
“Do the right thing”
“It’s not only about the results, it’s how we got the results.”
“Safety and ethics is our license to operate.”
These used to be buzz phrases. I hear them less and less. Now I hear “healthy tension”….which seems to be a free pass to be argumentative and stubborn….and I see the company aggressively cutting costs through all means, including those which aren’t upfront and transparent to employees.

Ironically, strong integrity may have only been present for the post-Valdez era with the OIMs onboarding. Prior to this, Exxon culture was known for having managers who would yell and occasionally throw things.

So history lesson complete. Companies change. But the focus on integrity has definitely changed too.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cm+1ktspagjk

He died today

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @b6+1ktspagjk

@aq Give me a break

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ar+1ktspagjk

XOM still has the highest ethical standards, so the commenter is unable to recognize integrity. There are no job guarantees, so layoff is not about integrity. Some people do lack integrity, but the vast majority has high integrity and XOM weeds out those who lack integrity/ethics. Sometimes it takes a while to id the executives who lack integrity but they eventually are identified and forced out.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @aq+1ktspagjk

"Culture of integrity". Lol. That is long gone. Rex and Darren destroyed that.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ab+1ktspagjk

@OP So He was basically a walking TED Talk, just without the TED or the talk quality

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a4+1ktspagjk

Post a reply

: