Once upon a time, many years ago, Management did acknowledge that the then existing ranking method was counterproductive, the old seriatim (sp?) ranking where the roses and thorns were slotted top and bottom while the rest of us landed somewhere in between. That was the beginning of the 1,2,3 groupings. Alas, most of those men are gone and another generation is in place having failed to learn from past history. Well, back to snoozing by the fireplace.
10 replies (most recent on top)
A bit of tongue and cheek humor, 1ckw. But you are not off the mark at all. So secret are the goings on at these meetings that many are held off site or on the top floor of a Chevron office building.
I was once told by an office assistant a week in advance in which conference room the ranking session was going to be held for my group. I went out to BabysRus and purchased a cheap baby monitor and stayed after work to later go to the conference to hide the monitor inside a credenza cabinet with an electrical outlet in it.
The day of the ranking session, I sat in a nearby touch down room and listened in on much of the crap that went down. I would leave and come back throughout the day, sometimes choosing to sit inside a bathroom stall with the earphones plugged in. There was a lot of politicking, laughter at times and general back stabbing taking place. There was even tie breaking games and coin flipping going on. I only had to listen for half the day to know what takes place in a Chevron ranking session. Shameful.
Well said, 1nqj. The metrics are thrown out and the good ol' boys and gals get in a closed room. If their are windows, they put poster paper over them, so you can't read lips and see the laughter and smug grins as they mark those for the cull and keep the "party members" safe.
@1akn, I'll ask you the same question. How better is the ranking system at other companies? Do you have firsthand knowledge? Have you ever participated directly in such a process. I'm not so naive to suggest that ranking processes are perfect and 100% fair, but please be honest to admit the Chevron ranking process us outside the norm the employees have experienced. The flaw is not the written process. The flaw is in the humans in the closed sessions that make exceptions and corrupt the process.
For all naysayers... How better is it at others companies? Do you think XOM ranking process is more fair and less subjective? If so, I encourage you to get a job there. You will be so much happier.
The ranking system sucks. Your fate rests in the hands of management and the subjective "feedback" process. F all of that I'm taking my severance and getting the hell out of corporate America, I'm way too human to be working for a corporation.
So the guy with the son and the jersey plays/ed the game. That's over and done with. You owned the situation, appealed to your supervisors and were rewarded. That was the game, you knew the rules and won. Deservedly so. That's fine with me, I accept that. It reminds me of the game 4 square I/we palyed in grammer school when it had rained for days and we could only play on the concrete because the playground was a sloppy mess. The goal was to become "King" of the court. When you became "King" you were allowed (and expected to) set the rules of the game. You were the head *mf in charge. You'ed rule on every questionable call and your ruling would be absolute and final. Being "King" allowed you to chose what rules you enforced and when you enforced them. Change the rules in the middle of the game, so what, I've got the ball, I make the rules, and I'm "King"; everyone else- deal with it.
Just seems like a parallel to what's happening now, difference is, I've got a wife and kids that have been pulled into this "hunger game" as well. The rules have changed so many times that I don't even care to tell my family what has changed.
Glad that we're making life easer on kangaroos and the Kurdistan region, the family sleeps better knowing that's being cared for.
To me it's not the ranking that is broken, I believe what is broken is, accountability at higher levels. We need to hold people accountable for overrun MCP's, overhiring CVX workforce where swing/contract workforce was needed to execute projects.
Until we do this sooner or later we are doomed.
If you are in Louisiana, then you must be referring to LSU. If you are in Texas, then you must be referring to UT Austin. I'm not surprised by your story. Either way though, what does that speak of you (pandering) and the managers (whoring).
I posted this before. My son plays football for a beloved school of Chevron managers. I got some signed jerseys a few years ago. I went straight to a 1. Really!
In Chevron, the ranking of employee performance within their PSG groups is a lame attempt at being equatable and fair. It's so subjective, that political correctness, affirmative action and gender balance all gets involved. It turns out to be a complete mess all the time. Then you have HR keeping score and weak supervisors being trampled by the more aggressive ones when trying to represent their direct reports. You also have two employees in the same PSG doing completely different jobs and the dilemma of who scores better than the other. Everyone gets the point... this broken ranking system needs to be changed. Perhaps management alone shouldn't be doing the ranking. Perhaps all the employees who were ranked a "1" and a random sample of "2+" from last year need to be part of the sessions too. Maybe a system of merits and demerits needs to be institutionalized at Chevron where all year long you earn or lose credits. Any good idea to fix the broken ranking system should be floated here and in the proper forums at work.