Thread regarding ExxonMobil Corp. layoffs

The anual interview process.

Every company runs some kind of performance assessment process to get rid of its slack and reward its overachievers.

But EM process looks much more to a poorly executed interview process than to an assessment process.

The PDS is your resume. Your supervisor is the hiring (or, more precisely, your re-hiring manager, and the ranking meeting is the closed-door, after-interview meeting where all managers decide if you are (re)hired or not. If you are (re)hired, your compensation is decided in this meeting too.

As an interview process this is incredibly inefficient: 1) The resume highlights only the short term accomplishments, 2) Only one hiring manager gets to read your resume. 3) the rest of the (re) hiring managers only get to listen a 2 min curated version of such resume. 4) Only 1 hiring manager has a face-to-face interaction with each candidate, 5) The (re)hiring committee is assessing 100 candidates applying to 95 unspecified available positions.

If we accept that our employment with EM is a 1-year contract, then we need to accept that we are re-applying every year to renew such contract and being interviewed for it

What's difficult to accept is that such interview process is so poorly executed, and that it is marketed by managers as an improvement and coaching program.

by
| 2453 views | | 7 replies (last ) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1m9F3ioJ

7 replies (most recent on top)

Annual*

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @3rfe+1m9F3ioJ

..."Career development strictly applies only to the consistent top performers"...

And this is the reason why the company has segregated so radically into "us" vs. "them":

If you rank at the top, your career is cared for. If your career is cared for, then you rank at the top. It's a self fulfilling prophecy that keeps caring for the chosen ones and neglecting the rest.

I also walked out after 15 years.

The compensation is below average, job security has vanished, and there's no career development if you are one of "us" and not one of "them".

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1rwm+1m9F3ioJ

The sooner you learn this about the system, the better:

  1. Your relative performance depends as much on your contributions as it does on your supervisor’s ability to effectively present them and stand up for them amongst his/her peers. Not all supervisors are created equal in this regard.
  2. Career development strictly applies only to the consistent top performers. The system goes through the motions for the rest and basically slots people into roles that are convenient. Any role can be spun as a career “development” opportunity.
by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1spa+1m9F3ioJ

@1ilt I did walk out - I'm just telling you what my experience was during my 15 years there before I resigned last year.

Right or wrong - we tolerated the opaque and paternalistic career "development" system in exchange for above average total comp and job security. Now that comp is below average, and job security is toast, why would anyone stay?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1xrx+1m9F3ioJ

Warning to potential new hires: What they don’t tell you is that you exchange control of your career for the big paycheck and the “privilege” of working at ExxonMobil. It used to be a place for job security and learning, but that is no more. people here will tell you that “the company owns your career.”

Managers have no idea how to structure organizations or assign the right people to the right task. Don’t waste a career spinning your wheels here.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1wxj+1m9F3ioJ

@bdn Then get up and walk out.

If you can’t get up and walk out then you’re getting what you’re worth in terms of both pay and treatment.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1ilt+1m9F3ioJ

The interview analogy only makes sense if it's a two-way street: an employer offers you a role, and you accept that job description. But once you're inside XOM, when was the last time any of us had a say in accepting the next job description? You don't have any say - you get told what your next job is - so you're then evaluated on something you had no agency in agreeing to.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bdn+1m9F3ioJ

Post a reply

: