Thread regarding ExxonMobil Corp. layoffs

You know what I find really bewildering? This phrase from the HR bs…. ‘ Establishing minimum levels in our lower performance category ensures we maintain a healthy talent pool that is motivated to continuously improve’
That is absolutely NOT the way to motivate anyone. It only ensures a demotivated workforce that will stab anyone in the back if it helps to improve their own ranking.
It is hard to work together and collaborate when it’s a competition to see who gets ranked better.
The id--ts who come up with this bu-----t are the ones ruining a once great company.

The only place where PIPs were not applied consistently was at the executive level.
Given demonstrated underperformance, consistent failure to meet KPIs, and even public repudiation by the shareholders, the management committee experienced no layoffs.
Does anyone believe their meritocracy nonsense??

Ran into a long retired EM Manager - “they have been using that system to get rid of people for ages”. I personally saw it happen years ago at a 3% rate - so yes it was being instituted. The difference is it used to be hush hush - UNTIL the media got a hold of it and they had to say something. Then the story became “we are so transparent and this is why it’s a good program”. Blabber.

Why the down votes??? This is what HR is communicating to employees.

"many parts of the Company were not managing this consistently in the past"
Then why hasn't management been punished for letting the company get too bloated?

Musical chairs with petty salaries that are below market market average. It will definitely help managing the talent pool!

"We expect to maintain this level for sometime and will continue to monitor that it meets our objectives." Objective being nothing other than reducing headcount. One year contracts for the unwashed.

Wow, This is actually a quote from HR website. Do they really think we will believe this garbage????

Can I be replenished please????????? 😁😁😁😁😁😁

Wow OP. That all sound really good on paper. But just to be sure, you should find some analogous companies that also applied a forced ranking system with strict minimum percent performance cutoffs for it's "talent pool" for comparison. I mean, if we are really serious about doing what's best for the company and the workforce, we should at least look at some case studies to ensure that HR and Management aren't repeating any past mistakes.

Let me suggest that you use Enron and GE as your analogs for this "minimum % performance" philosophy. How did it work out for those companies?

@xqc+1g1vMYpT you have NAILED it!

Due to lack of Executives being PIP’d in last two years, this year the Executive level PIP % should be 8+8+5=21%.

Seems reasonable because at the very least 21% of EM Executives Need Significant Improvement.

1 in 5 of us or 20% will still be Needs Improvement. A really motivating message.

As background, in 2020 and 2021, the NSI minimum was 8% as we found that many parts of the Company were not managing this consistently in the past.

So punish the managers for not doing their job! We didn't see any managers and executives get PIPed and fired!

Booo....

That's rich, how do you explain our worthless "leadership" team not suffering any NSI the last two years? GFY!

Drink the Koolaid #hotshot, is what our fearless (but worthless) leader BK would tell us.

Please keep drinking the Koolaid

Whoever wrote this in HR is either not good at English or can't even read and understand their own writings, especially look at the verbiage in 2nd paragraph. Dizzying for sure. Yikes! Love ya #hotshots!

Changing requirement of minimum every year gives away that the requirements are instituted first and then people to be pipped are sought out. #WeAreDefinitelyExxonMobil!