Nearly a decade ago when I was being interviewed by the Oil. Majors, the question about 'Company Culture' was a common theme and at that point in time, it felt like a nebulous concept. Not anymore. Having navigated one of the most volatile decades in the energy industry, I have seen and heard first hand what different company cultures look and feel like. It is never about your supervisor or manager only, albeit a repeat problem at that level is symptomatic of potential systemic issues. What really differs and matters is how the top brass chooses to execute job reduction plans or in good times share the success. I am proud to be a part of a culture that gives it's staff (which every company claims to be it's most valuable resource) chances to find job alternatives internally before letting them go with dignity. That's why I have very rarely seen staff be bitter when leaving, sad - yes but not bitter. Is it a slower less efficient way to handle things, absolutely. But, it safeguards the mental well being of everyone who still has to keep the lights on and ensures they don't feel an urge to watch their backs.
5 replies (most recent on top)
It's like taking a package of cheap package of hot-dogs and throwing them in boiling water. Which is best? The floater? The sinker? End up or down?
To the management of any company, it averages out.
To those fatty, meaty sausages, you are just a consumed hot dog, smothered in condiments. White bread roll. All the same.
Now.
When it comes to who is eating those fatty sausages in the real food chain.
Nobody knows.
Shell and CVX use their internal job posting process to cut people. It is also a flawed process. Not a single company has a "best in class" process and every company has regretted attriti0n and "non-regrettable attrition" and voluntry and involuntary resignation. I will be fun to watch the tech sector layoff (with much lower severance payments than oil and gas). Plus the tech sector equity compensation is largely underwater, so low base pay is what people are stuck with.
Shell has had much more frequent layoffs, although the execution was generally more humane (and at least the first cuts were based on competence and not politics). It’s nice in good times to be able to look for job openings and apply. But in bad times it’s a cruel musical chairs game where you’re forced to jump through hoops while management already knows who they’re keeping and who they’re cutting. Bonuses are nice, because they’re so much easier to save/invest when you get a lump sum, but overall you want to take less variable pay if all other things are equal.
Grass is always greener.
I’ll take the EM process of S&D finding job assignments for you, based on your inputs and company needs, over the Shell process of internal job applications any day. Imagine the stress once you’re half way into an assignment at Shell and have to start worrying about your next job!
These things are always subjective. I know a lot of people at Shell and while they do regularly overhaul their ranking/bonus systems to fix things (and currently it is no longer force distribution) my general impression was for every 1 thing Shell did "better" they did 2 worse. In particular to this post - their internal job application process is stressful. Basically after each assignment you are "at risk" unless you find a new job. There are some safeguards such that you are not immediately out of a job but generally if that scenario comes true it is similar as getting a "NSI" stamp on your back. Also they've been doing significant layoffs by forcing multiple people to apply for 1 position - winner takes all. Results in even bigger backstabbing than I've ever seen at EM. Another thing is that their promotion system is tied to your job and there is way more politics involved to achieve a promotion/new job (whereas in EM if you consistently perform in the top ~40% you will move up without to much hurdles... though politics may help in getting there faster).