How does one go from being a VP to manager in their next assignment? Does that show that the MC made a mistake in promoting the person and that they have topped out? Have they reached the level of their incompetence?
I’ve seen this happen in a couple of businesses recently and curious if this is a metric that HR should track better? What’s everyone’s vote?
22 replies (most recent on top)
There are a some VPs in GP that were either being moved to another part of EM or being asked to retire. (One of each)
But with new GP President these changes were delayed; though not sure why MC thinks that is better. It’s not like many of GP VPs have any real project competency nor good leadership behaviors. They just manage upwards well.
Related to this topic, why was the VP Lisa W fired unexpectedly in the middle of a business trip.
@17z Anyone who’s been in an executive role for 5+ years at a company like Exxon should be set for life. If not, they have real issues with handling money.
@1mr I had an absolutely terrible woman boss. Toxic/aggressive micromanagement, gaslighting, conflicts of interest (she repeatedly diverted resources from her team to assist her husband who was a manager in another business unit), and she would call 1.5- 2 hour meetings daily (yes, daily), for no apparent reason other than to listen to herself talk.
I put up with it because I kept thinking I was a s-xist if I pushed-back. When she tried putting me on a PIP for not taking her calls after hours (on my personal phone!) I had no choice but to go above her head. When executive leadership found out what she was doing, the antics stopped and she was moved to another part of the business (read: demoted).
Only promote people into leadership roles who have leadership skills.
The best are the one line Executive or VP departure announcements.... Definitely worth delving into the back story.
@1nj As a male, this comment seems so obvious but so few recognize it so thank you for voicing it. It’s truly disappointing to see these ‘yes women’ rise while hard-working, knowledgeable ones do not progress or are discounted by more senior female leaders. I think the VP and early exec females are great examples of this and have noted it quite often in the business functions (GSC now GBS, EMIT now EMTEC). It’s the same in the business lines actually but just masked easier because of the size of the groups. I do not see the female mindset changing in this company anytime soon…
@1mr+1kf39wc2w ironically they are least supportive of other females
@hj+1kf39wc2w the females promoted into VP roles over the last few years have been a particular disappointment, especially those with HR complaints and negative reputations. There are other female leaders who are capable of making good decisions and managing the stress without the abuse on their teams.
Yep, for a given CL with defined financial and personnel scope limits, it's a matter of title convention for the affiliate or partnership arrangement.
I’ve seen a few Execs lately being told there are no more exec seats for them… and they are +10 years from retirement. It’s going to be a long road for these folks as they’ve topped out. It will be tough downsizing from a Mercedes to a Toyota ;-)
There are a bunch of made up VPs in various places so they can pretend they are important when meeting with locals.
Then you see people who manage assets into the ground get promoted. Replaced by someone who succeed and revives the asset and then gets punished. It’s all a racket - whoever is the biggest yes man with the best connections wins.
@hj Agree fully, the more qualified and personable candidates with higher EQs need to take over. Not these VP wannabe buffoons who are warming seats and sticking their noses up their Sr VP or Presidents butts!
It is a strategy recommended by H/R and endorsed by the Management Committee (M/C) to show the world in future litigation that even Executives (i.e. VP and above) are not immune from our accelerated PIP/NSI strategy implemented in 2020 when we lost $20 billion USD due to the global pandemic.
Not sure I’d agree the chairman is draining the swamp. There are more than a handful of VPs that are simply terrible humans who aren’t effective leaders and don’t know much at all about how to navigate global business outside of their ExxonMobil bubble let alone think for themselves. There are much more highly qualified, proven capable, and genuinely nice people who should be rising into those roles.
“How does one go from being a VP to manager in their next assignment?”
This question is almost certainly being asked from the United States, because that’s the only place where the deification of executives is an integral part of the working culture.
In most other countries, an executive is just an employee with more responsibility, and like any other employee, they’re disciplined or fired when they fail at their job.
I think the original poster was referring to VP positions at headquarters in Houston. I’ve observed the same ‘demotion’ trend and these people seem to want ‘earn back’ their title so they will work the organizations under them heavily in the process. Management should institute some metric where of their KO feedback comes back negative then they will be asked to leave. These previous VPs don’t realize that when people talk, sometimes this feedback will reach their management anyway and their time is numbered.
The Chairman is really draining the Swamp, it’s just taking some time to force them out
Just validates more of how this company is an HR only by practice. Should be worried about how to develop people and be prifitable. It’s not even a technology shop.
XOM generally does not demote...It will pip instead. So title is the nature of the affiiate. AN relatively low level person can be a VP of a small affiliate. Lined in has caused a lot of confusion because VP of a small affiliate can be CL 28 to 32 oftentimes. In Asia, The title means alot, so VP of Business Development (for an affiliate) is often on the business card. If they use a VP of the Exxon Mobil Corporation. They had better be a true VP of Exxon Mobil Corporation...or get fired. Note the real company name is Exxon Mobil Corporation ...Not ExxonMobil..
Lots of VP titles out there for external effect only, but when a real VP doesn’t perform, they are asked to resign without the option to be demoted. The MC makes its final decisions just ahead of the December bonus awards and the VPs must be off payroll be July 1 of the following year.
Also - lot of VP roles are called VP because of local/governmental relationship needs but are actually just manager roles on paper. But yes, people do get chances at VP titles and don’t do well enough to progress and level out.
There is probably nothing for them to be vp of since the org is slimming and they have to go somewhere.
There are many people that were in manager jobs that now aren't in charge of anyone. It's not just Vps.