My observation is that Chevron is typical in having hard working staff and great supervisors trying to align to corporate strategy outlined by qualified executives. But, in between we have a massive layer of mediocre to terrible entrenched middle managers, PSG27-30. Most are near the top of their career, with limited or no potential for further advancement and huge competition to make the jump to PSG41. As a result, we see some truly terrible and often demotivating behaviors - mixed signals, rapid changes in business direction, threats/intimidation, and lack of support for underlings. This is where the political infighting is also at its worst as they all fight over who will get the next promotion.
17 replies (most recent on top)
I’m not familiar with the CTC ESD group but it seems to be a recurring complaint, along with iT and HR. Malo.
Worst GMs I have ever seen are in Human Resources. They are either d-mb but kind of nice or kind of smart but complete jerks.
Technical competency has gone out the window. I see that you don’t need it to be a top dog so I stop caring about it to. Learn, know, say just enough to BS the others. After that why learn it and why care about it. The company does not show value on stuff like that so why should I value it.
There are many mid level managers who are complete waste. CTC ESD is full of them. No vision, no competency, full of politics and utter chaos.
We see an increasing trend of managers bypassing critical technical training and "checking out" of technical interest in the work for which they are responsible. They don't know what they don't know and don't care. This leads to terrible decision-making and will have Chevron following in Boeing's footsteps, on top of being in an industry circling the drain.
Most Gms are between 48-58 or in other terms, they started their careers in 1990s. Chevron got the worst talent from grad schools during that time. You are now seeing the low performers perform.
In the old days the GMs were amazing. They were sharp, knew the business, the people, the industry and were quite inspirational. People looked up to them and respected them as leaders. These days those types are very rare. The staff view many of these people as buffoons.
I think 27 is max PSG for HR, no?
OP nailed it. The squishy middle.
the hardest job senior managers have is managing people. no wonder given the comments on these posts.... there is a better way. Help the senior managers get stuff done by doing your own job, helping them do theirs and dont be obsessed by your own views of who should and shouldnot have those roles, that you so clearly want. The amazing thing about this tactic is that when promotions come round you will actually get them. its called a win win.
I agree. No issues with real execs but the 27-30 GMs are the worst bunch of entrenched middle management politicos who sway in the wind. They are in it for themselves and will throw their staff under the bus in an instant. They really are the middle child because they are too far from the action to understand it and yet not high enough to make meaningful decisions. Many are not technically competent and are aware of it.
Tim M on the anchor project. You got the nail on the head
Executive management is the weakest link from an employee standpoint.
I suspect that the PSG 27-30 positions are staffed with as many good-to-excellent GM's as not... True be told individuals in these grade ranges are there as much for their strategic thinking, political maneuvering and business acumen as anything else. And, yes, I came across many that caused you to scratch your head in wonderment.
not quite. those grades have already proven themselves and are really execs not middle managers. you need to go to the 24-26 level to see the talentless, bitter, backstabbing crew.
Yep
Amen, brother.