PeekingDuck said:

---

I would think the 'attrition issues' are intentional. COP did the same a while back. Though disconnected management in an organization that large isn't too surprising. I honestly didn't know they still had any real Dallas footprint. That's interesting.

---

No doubt it is intentional. It's also unfortunate that it is being done in that manner. Seems the workforce would be better served to just cut the cord one time with a deep reduction in force and then regroup from there. A slow bleed doesn't really help anyone and it sows distrust for years to come.

XOM corporate has always been in Dallas

Yeah, I just figured they moved when they built the campus.

I agree. Didn't sit well with me while I was at COP either. Surprised it was said out loud by one of the L48 managers. Decided then that I should probably find another company to work for.

That's really surprising to hear about XOM. Just a few years ago they could hand pick talent and everyone there (that I crossed paths with) seemed satisfied and bought in to the culture.

The slow drain approach reduces severance packages. The thought is the weaker ones leave but seems to be the opposite lately with tech being the exodus point for technical talent.

Accounts etc. all are a dime a dozen at big companies.

Cyp0111 said:

---

The slow drain approach reduces severance packages. The thought is the weaker ones leave but seems to be the opposite lately with tech being the exodus point for technical talent.

Accounts etc. all are a dime a dozen at big companies.

---

in general, it always has been and always will be the ones who can (because they're good with plenty of options) who leave in this situation. The ones they want to leave don't have the ability to walk away from just good enough into a situation that requires them to prove themselves.

So in an effort to save money on unemployment companies push away their best people and end up struggling moving forward. If you are creating a lean environment where you need you employees to do more, it just makes sense that the worst employees will somehow find a way to pull that off seamlessly. Rough days down the line for them as a company.

Pretty bitter post, no ?

It's how mid management ends up so weak in America. Stay low, do nothing and be cheap relative

Cyp0111 said:

---

It's how mid management ends up so weak in America. Stay low, do nothing and be cheap relative

---

I found myself in this situation after a merger. Merger was a mess, infighting for control, no one was allowed to make decisions, re-orgs over and over and over. I reported to 3 VPs and multiple Directors in a one year period with multiple times with no actual business unit head. Realized I had 2 options.

Stick around and try to fall up and fill the power void that would be left when the dust settled.
or
Get the heck out and leave a company in which I hoped to retire long down the road.

I was recruited to a promotion in a different segment of the industry. It didn't work out for me as that company was also a mess, but the few I know still there haven't received a raise since I left over 4 years ago, are doing the job of multiple people often above their actual title, and wish they had left long before. What was the best company I had ever seen is treading water and circling the drain. Cut off their own legs in a bad merger in an effort to get just big enough so they didn't get gobbled up in the downturn. Sad.

LostInLA07 said:

---

Well, you see, the new campus is in Spring, Texas. That would have created a less convenient commute for the C-Suite relative to their Dallas HQ vs. their homes and clubs. There simply weren't enough open lots in East Shore and Carlton Woods to accommodate everyone. Also, have you ever tried the commute to/from Lone Star Execute in Conroe?

Plus none of the wives wanted to move because they are still vying for a Real Housewives of Dallas spot and Houston doesn't have a show.

So, for business reasons and such, it was necessary to leave HQ in Dallas.

Same compelling business reasons as Chevron and their San Ramon, CA headquarters.

---

An Exxon executive once told me that if I ever saw the Irving office, I'd know why they'll never move.

Side note, I don't see a parking garage. It looks like everyone there is expected to have a private driver drop them off.

I think the draw is it's a pretty small office relative to their other locations so they don't have a lot of traffic and don't have to bother running into worker bees unless they hop on the jet to the Houston campus.

I can't remember if I read it or someone said it to me, but their official reasoning is "to give the business units based in Houston a sense of autonomy from corporate."

I never understood why they built out in Spring. It's a terrible commute for 80% of people.

Exxon should have built a super tall tower in Downtown or Uptown. Like everybody in Houston knows the Transco Tower, they would know the ExxonMobil tower and have generated so much value in branding by building a super tall tower. It'd be the tower shown on postcards of Houston. Also in 30-40 years when it's time to build a new tower they could easily sell their tower. Only community college would purchase their campus now

I was involved in a merger almost identical to this.

And tying to Exxon, the company we merged with had a separate office for just their C Suite in the same city. It actually worked well for the merger because the big wigs could just meet there and never worry about who saw them. But why the hell would a company with multiple offices in houston pay for a floor in a luxury high rise building just for their C Suite?!?! And why wouldn't they want to be in the same location? I'm far from an Exec, but still met with various c suite members at least a couple times a month.

Dan Scott said:

---

I never understood why they built out in Spring. It's a terrible commute for 80% of people.

Exxon should have built a super tall tower in Downtown or Uptown. Like everybody in Houston knows the Transco Tower, they would know the ExxonMobil tower and have generated so much value in branding by building a super tall tower. It'd be the tower shown on postcards of Houston. Also in 30-40 years when it's time to build a new tower they could easily sell their tower. Only community college would purchase their campus now

---

Partially hubris and partially because they wanted it to be a campus where workers felt like they could practically live there due to all the amenities rather than just a work place. That is cheaper to do outside of town rather than building a really tall tower. Plus workers in towers tend to stick to just their floors. In a complex they are more likely to collaborate and see other people outside of just their department. Previously Exxon offices were scattered all over town. I'm guessing Spring was chosen since a vast number of higher up probably live out toward the woodlands since they were previously in the Greenpoint towers. Its the same reason why so many other companies have moved out toward the suburbs. Enough higher ups live out toward that suburb that the people in charge begin questioning why they are all commuting into town in the first place.

Bismarck said:

---

LostInLA07 said:

---

Well, you see, the new campus is in Spring, Texas. That would have created a less convenient commute for the C-Suite relative to their Dallas HQ vs. their homes and clubs. There simply weren't enough open lots in East Shore and Carlton Woods to accommodate everyone. Also, have you ever tried the commute to/from Lone Star Execute in Conroe?

Plus none of the wives wanted to move because they are still vying for a Real Housewives of Dallas spot and Houston doesn't have a show.

So, for business reasons and such, it was necessary to leave HQ in Dallas.

Same compelling business reasons as Chevron and their San Ramon, CA headquarters.

---

An Exxon executive once told me that if I ever saw the Irving office, I'd know why they'll never move.

---

Been to the Irving office, nothing special.

techno-ag said:

---

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

TommyGun said:

---

AustinAg008 said:

---

CrazyRichAggie said:

---

*Exxon Debates Abandoning Some Major Oil and Gas Projects, Sources Say$XOM

— *Walter Bloomberg (@DeItaone) October 20, 2021

---

Yikes. What a cluster that group has become.

---

That place is a toxic mess right now. Dallas is completely disconnected with the pulse of the organization and the management in Houston has to be getting tired of trying to gloss over the attrition issues they've had and motivate their teams. I think 90% of my friends and LinkedIn connections who have worked there have left this past year. Including some who were completely bought in as "lifers" just 18 months ago.

---

What happened? Did they go completely braindead wome or something?

It is mind-boggling to me how out of touch corporate gets from the field, aka the people who make the company money, the bigger the company gets. How is it possible to have so little understanding of your average employee or worker?

I am of the opinion that every corporate department in a corporation that is primarily industry should be forced to go out into the field and work on-site for a week or two and also discuss that aspect of the business with field to gain feedback and to in general learn more about how the field operates.

Yes this would cost money, but it's necessary given how so many people who work in corporate don't actually even understand what the company even does.

---

A couple new board members are environmentalist SJWs.

---

You mean they are from Blackrock, etc. and other large financial shareholders who are pushing this crap. Individual shareholders do not have the power to do any of this anymore.

The Board of all of these public companies has become a nightmare and an active hindrance to do legitimate business.

Engine No. 1

https://engine1.com/team-bio

no chance one person on that team is anything but a full on lib.

LostInLA07 said:

---

I think the draw is it's a pretty small office relative to their other locations so they don't have a lot of traffic and don't have to bother running into worker bees unless they hop on the jet to the Houston campus.

I can't remember if I read it or someone said it to me, but their official reasoning is "to give the business units based in Houston a sense of autonomy from corporate."

---

I can see it both ways. The executives like living in Dallas, they don't want to move. Also, having a very private headquarters means you can host executives from banks, consultants, etc without having a bunch of rumors spread around because a worker saw someone. Dallas has a very large financial industry presence. Every companies executive team ultimately functions like a bank and needs to tend to banking activities like negotiating debt.

But the cost of an executive distortion reality field is you ultimately lose touch with who makes you the money. Its a whole lot easier to implement a slow bleed of a company when you don't have to see its repercussions from your corporate private island.

Exxon is doing what I want as a shareholder.

Cut costs, restrain capex to only the best projects, focus on fcf. Take away the build it all cost approach common with engineers. Exxons problem is they have too many engineers running things. They're fixing that now with some more financial acumen.

TommyGun said:

---

AustinAg008 said:

---

CrazyRichAggie said:

---

*Exxon Debates Abandoning Some Major Oil and Gas Projects, Sources Say$XOM

— *Walter Bloomberg (@DeItaone) October 20, 2021

---

Yikes. What a cluster **** that group has become.

---

That place is a toxic mess right now. Dallas is completely disconnected with the pulse of the organization and the management in Houston has to be getting tired of trying to gloss over the attrition issues they've had and motivate their teams. I think 90% of my friends and LinkedIn connections who have worked there have left this past year. Including some who were completely bought in as "lifers" just 18 months ago.

---

As someone who works there now, I can say there are many people leaving. That being said, I've been through worse layoffs/downturns so I'm thinking XOM employees have been coddled compared to others in the industry.

Yes, there are still problems and I'm not sticking up for management (was disappointed with the latest employee forum). But this is only toxic in XOM employee's eyes. Not nearly as bad as what many other O&G people have seen.

Dan Scott said:

---

I never understood why they built out in Spring. It's a terrible commute for 80% of people.

Exxon should have built a super tall tower in Downtown or Uptown. Like everybody in Houston knows the Transco Tower, they would know the ExxonMobil tower and have generated so much value in branding by building a super tall tower. It'd be the tower shown on postcards of Houston. Also in 30-40 years when it's time to build a new tower they could easily sell their tower. Only community college would purchase their campus now

---

No, it's not a terrible commute for 80%. Do you think 80% live downtown?

I've lived in Houston for 25+ years and in another 10-15 years their location will be considered "downtown".

FTSI being acquired by ProFrac…..

Not shocking. Where are you seeing this?

aggie_wes said:

---

Not shocking. Where are you seeing this?

---

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20211022005221/en/FTS-International-to-Be-Acquired-by-ProFrac-for-26.52-Per-Share-in-Cash

https://www.hartenergy.com/exclusives/privately-held-profrac-buy-fts-international-4075-million-cash-196937?mkt_tok=NDMzLU9ESy04ODkAAAGAR1Hj-ZmY_7S8OYDW37-NFwdXVpjKevqiIgQnfmQ4ysuRVTmFGuojLk7TcJgKYG1CIVUQiLIiUhm1gjQ7WwWGxEC9Dce_22K27V1vHVBidJCZ

What did the wilks originally sell FTSI for compared to what they're buying it back for?

sold Frac Tech for $3.5bil

Wow