Thread regarding ExxonMobil Corp. layoffs

I am one of the lucky ones who went from a solid middle performance to bottom 10%. It was shocking to hear, but after reading these comments, it's making a lot more sense. It was communicated in the end that I didn't have any notable technical deficiencies, but that it could be summed up as a "bad attitude." That's obviously very subjective, and while I have pushed back, I wouldn't say I'm a bully or anything like that, by a long shot. My colleagues are shocked I'm in this position, but I do believe it all works out in the end. As far as I can see, this company is heading into very precarious waters. Starting to weed out good employees, while propping up the leeches. This looks a lot like what GE went through, and continues to go through. I may take PIP to see if it works (a lot easier to change a bad attitude than technical deficiencies), but to the points made earlier, there is very little chance of a long term end game for me at EM. It's a shame, because when I started, it was still an exciting and fun place to work. A lot has changed since then over the past decade.

This also creates an environment of unhealthy competition where colleagues are pitted one against the other in order to to survive. Those who remain, have to become political animals just to secure their jobs. What a sad situation.

It’s coming, it may be 8% this time, but next year and the year after another 8%. EM stretching it out this time to avoid bad press and shareholders getting involved.
Those that are left, are going to have to work their a** off so they are not on a PIP next year. It will constantly be hanging over you to do more and more and also, s— up more to those making the decisions on who gets a PIP. It will be so cut throat within the department and those that made it through this time fall to the bottom next year.

Sounds like the reality. But then again.. the quality of people we hire are generally good and will be able to survive well out of XOM. So my suggestion is, always been a look out for the next opportunity and don’t expect the company to take care of your career for you. XOM is merely compensating you for the work hours you are expect to work, please don’t expect more and it’s fair and square. Ciao.

Reality - Your comments are very short sighted and seem as though you have drank the Kool-aid of HR. Your assumption that all being PIP'd are truly low performers is absurd if you are truly familiar with the EM performance and ranking system. You ignore the stereotypes and unconscious bias (i.e. management tract associates ranked with technical tract associates by management tract associates) that infects the process as much of EM management lacks the ability to perform within reality of team and seeks to preserve "self" at all costs without any guilt or accountability as the controls of the company do little to hold management accountable for decision or actions. P.S. I am taking my 30 years of specialized experience out the door and no way in HELL will I train my successor without extra $$$ in severance. Good Luck XOM. Selling soon!

The most amusing part about Reality’s comment is that ExxonMobil is still arrogant enough to believe that other companies aren’t smart enough to have thought through the potential loss of otherwise good employees.

Reality: Your words are very eloquent but very misguided. You obviously pride yourself on being a realist and “say it how it is” but at the same time you are missing some factual information over this “workforce reduction” that is not a lay-off.

Since the bottom 11-20% of the company has either taken a PIP, mostly like to later be laid off, or being forced into resignation the workforce is already disrupted as training, personnel, and other items will be in flux for 8-12 weeks, or more, while trying to find the best fits.

Also, the reductions were not done based on performance, I believe the words management was advise to use were “trouble developing relationships or communication”. I watched as extremely low performers who don’t even come to work were ranked up because of other factors and all out arguments came up with people who have pointed out major management flaws, design changes, etc (You know, things that actually need people to WORK and be held accountable to measure).

Lastly, as a manager I can say this... if you try to measure success based off of communication and relationship building and it is up to just a supervisor (with no written PIP or HR involvement whatsoever) then you will constantly be told you have needs for improvement. Even DW could improve on his relationships and communication.

Yes, the 80s were tough for Exxon but they also didn’t lose their credit score requiring them to make these cuts or their overall integrity in the process. As they have done with their recent actions. Their stock fell as the market feels they are not being trustworthy with trying to hide a lay-off with a process review.

In 1986, XOM did exactly what you proposed and it was highly disruptive and costly. Lost many experienced people earlier than expected with little time to train replacements. We also lost a surprising number of hi potential people who went to grad school, med school or back home. These people would have left on their own eventually without taking shareholder money. Cutting low performers systematically and fairly is the way to go. The key question is can the system id the truly low performers. In general, yes. But a system managed by people and in some cases weak supervisors. Strong performers who do not show their strengths might lose out to a big mouth weak performer. No single supervisor makes the decision. their are management oversights and HR safeguards. 1986 was a 30% reduction. It was Brutal. This is minor, unless you are in the 8%.