- Within a short amount of time, I found myself tuning out because it was the same old empty rhetoric, glittering generalities, and redundant verbosity
- Gaslighting us by telling us that people are leaving because they want to "pursue their dream", which is utter nonsense. Attrition is so high because this place is a dumpster fire.
- I've found that in meetings like this, you get presenters sharing their positive career path and experiences at XOM like it is evidence that the system works, and it is the same kind of thing that everyone across the board can experience. The reality is that there are relatively few who have the kind of rich, rewarding career that these people talk about. This has got to be some sort of logical fallacy: "I've had a wonderful career at XOM, therefore everyone can have one!"
- Aside from a few people mentioning it briefly, there was very little acknowledgement or discussion of the giant elephant in the room; i.e., the rapid attrition of good people. Classic "if we don't acknowledge it, it doesn't exist and isn't a problem"
- They're really emphasizing this laughable "IT Fellow" distinction like it is the best thing since sliced bread. Do they honestly think this is a legitimate benefit/reason to entice technical folks to stick around. Who gives a sh-t about this title. It is meaningless, the the few people that get the distinction are probably the same kind of people who thrive in the broken and rigged ranking system. It'll be fellows scratching the back of other fellows.
- The "choose your own adventure" analogy to describe a technical career at XOM is utter horse sh-t. Again, there might be a (very) relatively small number of people who have this kind of experience, but the vast majority of people are subject to the will of their supervisor and the fu---d up S&D process.
- They repeatedly shifted the blame of a sub-par career at XOM onto the victims (the employees working their as--s off). Typical abusive treatment and rhetoric. One can do everything within their power to get a role they want on a team they want to be on, but ultimately someone's career is in the hands of their supervisor and management.
- This quote from the meeting explains life at XOM perfectly "...if nobody knows about your skill and achievements, it doesn't matter...". This same person (PB) went on to claim that most technical people at XOM neglect their personal networks. I disagree, technical folks just don't make building and babysitting their network a full time job like the numerous redundant layers of management across the organization. They're too busy getting actual work done so their "superiors" can take credit for their work (probably without their knowledge).
- It was clear from the presentation that there is no place at XOM for the passionate, hard-working, reliable, technical, and talented _individual_ contributor. According to them, everybody needs to be a "contributes through others" type of person. Individual contributors, even if they are helping their team succeed in a smaller sphere of influence, will continue to get sh-t on.
- "Contributes through others" is corporate-speak for "takes credit for the work of others, while contributing little to nothing to the actual completion of the work"
- The fallback/catch-all answer to many of the questions, especially anything remotely challenging, was of course "have a conversation with your supervisor..." or "your supervisor should be doing/saying this...". What if your supervisor is an incompetent id--t? Then you're fu---d. Way too much power rests in the hands of supervisors at XOM. They have the ability to destroy a person's career.
- I feel like you need to be a fu----g rocket scientist to understand the current "technical career system" and its many nuances, acronyms, etc.
- If EMIT/XOM is doing so much for people with a desire for a rewarding technical career, why is the company brain-draining and losing so many incredible people?
- I've stated it above already... but so much of a person's career is based on "supervisor roulette". If you get a bad one, you're fu---d.
- The repeated falling back on "we're not perfect..." and "people aren't perfect..." and "the system isn't perfect..." got old very fast. Yes, it isn't perfect, and that is fine. Yes, management isn't perfect, and that is also fine. If the system and management/leadership were even remotely mediocre, we'd be in decent shape. But as we all know, that is NOT the case.
- Another great quote "...if you want to advance, you have to play by the book...". Sounds about right. You don't advance by kicking a-s at your job, you have to "play by the book" (i.e., play the ranking game).
Anyone have any other thoughts?