Arcadis reviews

Please consider this post a 'warning buoy' about the WRPC. Only accept a position there as a short-term pivot to a better opportunity with a better firm. I was sold a bill of goods when hired; told I had a team of four but in reality had one PE (for a while) plus an EIT... then only the EIT. Arcadis expected me to secure projects in the Twin Cities despite having no local talent to do the work, then vilified me for failing to meet their expectations. We did put out proposals, and just as I warned, Arcadis was not hired because we'd have to ship in staff from other cities. The client feedback was exactly as I predicted: literally, "you don't have a team of local talent". After my 40 years of world-wide consulting engineering experience spanning four firms ranging in size from 25-37,000 people, including being an owner of one of those firms, I thought I had seen it all. But the level of incompetence on which WRPC operates day-to-day is unique. WRPC management doesn't listen to someone on the ground with experience, and they don't listen to their potential clients. In addition, for the past 20+ years, I have known the person who previously sat in my chair in WRPC. That person reported the same incompetent leadership before they left Arcadis. This is a systemic problem. At this point, not easily fixable. If the management of the WRPC continues to lead this way, Arcadis should just shut it down now. It's a waste of corporate treasure. The BIPC leadership is near retirement. Unfortunately it shows. Do not expect an interactive relationship. If you can be self-supporting, working in BIPC is okay. But BIPC is is siloed and not welcoming. If you like to work problems collaboratively, BIPC will not be pleasant for you. Also, BIPC staff are very inexperienced. Succession planning clearly did not exist in BIPC.

Compensation for architects and interior designers is significantly below market, especially for New York City. With inflation and the cost of living continuing to skyrocket, the salaries offered are simply not sustainable. Raises do not keep pace with reality, and the expectation seems to be that employees absorb the financial burden. Benefits are minimal and outdated. There is little to no mentorship, licensure support, or structured professional development. The firm lacks senior architectural and interior design leadership, leaving junior and mid-level staff without technical guidance, design direction, or advocacy. Leadership instability is a major red flag. The company has gone through multiple CEO changes within a six-year span, and each transition brings shifting priorities, rebranding efforts, and empty promises—without addressing core issues like retention, compensation, or culture. This constant churn at the top creates confusion, low morale, and a lack of confidence in any long-term vision. Rigid in-office expectations persist despite clear evidence that flexible schedules improve productivity and retention. This lack of trust in employees only accelerates burnout and turnover. Turnover overall is high and ongoing. Senior architects and designers regularly resign, often taking their teams with them. Institutional knowledge walks out the door, projects suffer, and remaining staff are left understaffed and overworked. Remaining leadership lack industry knowledge of what’s new and exciting. Unwillingness to provide direction, goals, or a positive team environment. Stuck in their ways. This is not an environment for architects or interior designers seeking mentorship, stability, or sustainable career growth. The firm relies heavily on junior talent while failing to invest in the leadership and compensation required to retain them.