Thread regarding ExxonMobil Corp. layoffs

Red flags

Here are some red flags of an unfair performance assessment.

  1. Lack of specific examples.

*criticisms without concrete instances.

  1. Recency bias dominates.

*Ignore achievements from earlier periods.
*Over emphasis on recent minor incidents
*Dismissal of consistent past performance.

  1. Moving goal post.

*Changing success criteria after the fact.
*Adding new expectations without prior communications.
*Different standards for different team members.

  1. Personality over performance. *Criticism of personal traits versus output

*comments about cultural fit without specifics
*comments about personality, but lack of specificity about behavior.

  1. Feedback without documentation. *Inability to reference performance conversations.

*Surprise critiques never mentioned before
*Lack of paper trail or evidence for claimed issues.

  1. Ignoring context and constraints. *Disregard resource limitations.
  • Not considering external factors.
  • Overlooking organization obstacles.
  • Dismissing valid explanations.
  1. Pattern of bias

*different standard based on non-work factors.
*Consistent negative interpretations of actions.
*Overlooking similar behavior in others.

  1. Process violations.

*Skipping require review steps.
*Not following companies evaluation, procedures
*excluding or cherry pick feedback from stakeholders

  • rushing through important discussions or avoid discussions
by
| 2489 views | | 18 replies (last ) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1jha8exry

18 replies (most recent on top)

Red flag at EM. You go in not knowing you've already ranked top quintile.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @17v+1jha8exry

Nearly all of that happened during my last performance assessment which is why I left the company several years ago when I was ranked Good. I could see the PIP writing on the wall the following year, so I left before PIP season.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @13r+1jha8exry

Just like accounting best practices, "Trust but Verify" is the best way to ensure that performance assessments are accurate. There is too many examples of bias in everyone's assessment.

For example, there was one employee in Clinton who turned in his "draft" performance assessment every year for a decade just by xeroxing the previous year's assessment. No manager caught on for 10 years that he was just copying the previous year's assessment. It goes to show you that your "draft" performance assessment means nothing in ranking and rating.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @qn+1jha8exry

In other news water is wet.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ph+1jha8exry

I am also a few years away from retirement. I am NRE and they cannot do anything to motivate me. They can however do a lot to demotivate me. I was given no raise, dropped in ranking, harassed and micromanaged and watched by the spies. So how is my output and caring for the next year going to be? I will show up to work do my 8 hours in prison and leave. I will take all of my personal time and 6 weeks vacation off. The supervisor is trying to be my friend and motivate me to work more a big NOT. I do not offer any ideas or improvement any more as my input is not wanted. I am being underutilized in my current role and am fine with this. I have hiding works best so I spend lots of time walking around the campus and visiting the restrooms. I am trying to use every restroom at EMHC at least twice for the next few years. I was banned from outside training and customer visits because they said it was not creating value. So I will hide for a three more years.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @gk+1jha8exry

I can attest to the validity of OP's statements - the one thing that's been consistent in my career at EM is the WTF of my performance assessments & ranking results. But now that retirement is only 2 years away, I've stopped caring. Not going to waste emotional energy worrying about something that my work contributions cannot change and that is clearly rigged and opaque.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @gd+1jha8exry

Stream the ranking sessions on Zoom. Record and allow individuals to listen to the conversation during their own 2 minutes. Provide a transcript. Lots of solutions for transparency.

Sessions are dominated by a few voices, the rest are tasked to fit the narrative.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @dj+1jha8exry

So passive aggressive is what your saying.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @dg+1jha8exry

If you are a US worker in a right to work state, don’t fret over the ranking system. They can fire you without cause at any time as long as the reason doesn’t violate the law (eg fired for religious beliefs, etc..).

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @db+1jha8exry

This red flag should be right below the American flag on the flag pole in Clinton

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cm+1jha8exry

@bn+1jha8exry Thanks to ageism, that’s the truth everywhere.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ca+1jha8exry

@bz+1jha8exry - fair enough

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @c0+1jha8exry

I am ranked according to likability. I have never been ranked by my technical accomplishments relative to peers. All the tech and innovation has done is kept me afloat. They go into the ranking meeting and my handler talks for a few minutes about a few things I did. Then the other managers give their take on me. I don't know nor have ever meet or done anything for these other a holes. So if you are not known or even noticed by this select few you are sc--wed. I gave up caring years ago. I just do my work and try to get by. I have performed above what my peers have in years past and I has only resulted in a good rating. The others got excellent or outstanding for less output. It is all BS and I don't try to understand it or improve. It is hopeless for some. You will not find justice or fairness at exxon period. The game is fixed so find happiness elsewhere.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bz+1jha8exry

Imagine how incredible it would be that when there is relative ranking involved, everyone’s ranking, goals, and outcomes against goals were fully transparent to all.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bv+1jha8exry

If y’all have relative ranking, don’t forget that it is not just about your performance alone. You may have ki-led it relative to your own and your supervisors expectations, and your peers simply out perform you and deliver more value.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bt+1jha8exry

Most performance assessments will tend to be unfair the longer you stay in the company. That's the system, and we won't beat it unfortunately.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bn+1jha8exry

What if those who can confirm contributions are no longer around? Pip or retired.

What about the KO who can confirm your contributions are also the ones you compete with in the ranking? Including your boss? Do you think they will be fair?

What about supervisor who fail to complete previous year’s assessment? If the person was thought to be high flyer, he was excused from doing his job. Yes, that does happen at XOM.

What about supervisor cherry picking KO feedback for the assessment?

What about supervisors who goes MIA and gave no feedback for the entire year. Set themselves apart and gave excuse they are too important or busy. Only gave matching orders for their reports or fail to listen.

HR does not respond. They exist to protect the company from lawsuits, not you.

There is no mechanism to weed out horrible bosses and the performance assessment is flawed. This is a terrible place to work despite the shiny exterior.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @b7+1jha8exry

The process would be more effective and less biased if:

  1. individuals wrote down and submitted their contributions
  2. others were asked to confirm accuracy of statements
  3. a panel of assessors evaluated contributions based on written submissions without knowing names
  4. supervisors provided coaching and feedback but did not have such singular influence on an individuals performance
by
| | Reply
Post ID: @b3+1jha8exry

Post a reply

: