Thread regarding Schlumberger Ltd. layoffs

Is it time for PK to step aside and let someone else take over?

If this was a football team and with the results over the past few years he would have been replaced long ago. SLB has lost it’s competitive edge and is underperforming. Underperforming emoliyees usually get laid off in SLB unless of course you are in the executive team. The strategic blunders are many including losing billions in unpaid debt to the Latin oil companies, missing out in the shale revolution in USA, incompetent reorganization of the company losing some of our best managers resulting in low performance of the company, starting a business line to compete with your customers, launching the failed transformation initiative that led to mass demotivation of the work force and then launching another attempt to mechanically motivate people with engage to excel, buying Cameron for an excessive price just in the moment when the offshore market died and won’t recover for years, getting our a-- kicked by Hal in most of our markets. Need I go on? Time for change and a leader who knows what they are doing. Bring back Gould?

by
| 2801 views | | 10 replies (last December 11, 2017) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+QkhAWVa

10 replies (most recent on top)

PK is not underperforming.

Signed,

PK

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @mbsn+QkhAWVa

Someone needs to start investing in the people and the assets, i do not think the current team know how to invest in the current organization and how to motivate them.

Until then the ship will continue to sink slowly, a real shame for the employees to have to bail out the CEO during a down cycle as opposed for the CEO to invest in the company and prop up the dividend payments.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @eyiw+QkhAWVa

If PK was applying to himself the rules he is imposing on others he would be gone already. That's a recurring problem in slb: managers are demanding with subordinates and tend to be self-complacent.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @6nux+QkhAWVa

I think SLB’s biggest problem today is no one can effectively speak or write in English. If this board is any indication, then the company is totally doomed.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @3gpg+QkhAWVa

90% owns by fin inistitu, hard to believe they will remain happy,if they are, with current stock price. They have been quite so far, any depart will result in exodus,imo

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1kxy+QkhAWVa

I think the top management should take accountability to damaging the company brand and losing edge to the competitors. The tricks don’t even work on stock market now. Is it a sinking ship? Where is the stock holder committee? Should someone to call for actions? If the top ones are selfish ones, what they can bring to the company?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1ork+QkhAWVa

You don't need CEO's. They do not make decisions, take accountability, nor do they add any value. If they were involved in founding the company they supposedly lead or own massive amounts of shares you may argue that they need to be in control. But certainly not this clown show.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1rtg+QkhAWVa

Buying Cameron seemed to be for professionalism and organization.

They wanted Cameron's SAP system that controls accounting, purchasing, engineering BOMs, HR, and production.

They wanted Cameron's engineering system for organization.

I thought SLB would have been more advanced than Cameron, but no. Cameron was more advanced than SLB. From what I see Cameron is saving SLB and making it a more efficient company.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @qdd+QkhAWVa

One thing ok can fix is to layoff useless none necessary employee and managers who are still there because of connection to higher management.

If past layoffs were right, company would have performed better when oil price raise by $10 but share price still low. Imo

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @vrj+QkhAWVa

So, what was his "astounding" performance so far?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @wgw+QkhAWVa

Post a reply

: