Eastman reviews

A lack of leadership in Senior Management. Upper management reacts peevishly to perceived slights (a slight is disagreeing in any way with their point of view). The only way to advance is to be a yes man (picture a bobble head doll). Any past slight (see above) can land personnel (hourly and salaried) on a black-list for advancement or special assignments. Redemption is rare (hence the use of the word peevish). Sycophants are welcome and appreciated (remember the bobble head doll) and can expect advancement and praise; just never voice contradictory opinions. Two misguided views of Leadership held by management: 1) Leadership is viewed solely as one's ability to agree with and back enthusiastically any decision, new idea, edict, etc., that issues down from above, and 2) Your ability to react positively to negative news, reviews (these can be scathingly personal), disrespect and downright rudeness (you will be tested and later informed of how well you succeeded or how miserably you failed - remember the use of the word peevish).This is done in the name of "developing you". Needless to say, morale is the lowest I've experienced in well over 20 years working at this site. The glowing reviews and "we are a family" attitudes expressed by people from the Longview, TX and Kingsport, TN plants are not heard here. Personnel here at the Texas City site have to look at the name on the sign out front to remind themselves that they work for Eastman.

Since Eastman became a publicly traded company there have only been 2 women that have made it to the inner C-suite circle. If you are looking for true gender equality, Eastman might not be the right choice. Those in charge of this important and needed culture change hold up the same few that have made VP as "the" examples but the general population of women are still not viewed as equals or have equal opportunities. Those that are selected for advancement to high leadership levels tend to have no children (% of women with 2 or more children at Director and above, does not mirror that of the overall female population at Eastman). Promotions occur annually and are governed by an Advancement Ladder criteria. There are many levels which could be used to reward, recognize and engage employees. However the practical implementation has changed such that a significantly smaller percentage of employees are allowed to occupy the top rungs. Employees that aren't selected as "the stars" that gets to advance past the career rung, become bitter and disengaged. This system is more about who knows and likes you, than what you do. No doubt, those that reach the highest levels are solid performers but Eastman hires only the best and brightest. The system leaves many highly contributing, employees parked on the career level rung. Another annual practice is the rating of employees. No one will say the distribution is fixed but at the same time, there must always be people on the left side of the curve. Each year, if the "non-performers" leave, employees with solid contribution and performance have to worry that he/she will be deemed in the lower percentiles during the next annual cycle. There has to be something better.