Booz Allen Hamilton reviews

During my last few years Booz Allen changed. I think the quality of Booz Allen has gone down. - They promoted several people who had been fired by the client and the more of a jerk/backstabber you were the more quickly you climbed the ladder. - They started giving lack of work letters to people who had been with the company 10+ years and who had always been stellar performers versus looking at the people who were marginal performers (but who currently happened to be billable). - When I left for maternity leave I handed over PM responsibilities I had to a co-worker "x". When I returned a new level had been introduced and person to whom I had handed over my PM responsibilities, "x" was promoted and I was not. When I asked why I had been promoted to the "lead" role the manager said it was because I did not have the project management experience and said "x" got promoted because she's leading "y" project (my old project). When I explained that I had previously led "y' project, the manager said Oh I forgot about that and said well I had to chose and I chose "x".

As others have acknowledged, the corporate culture has distinctly changed. "Billability" has become the lowest common denominator for determining employee value; upon contract end, you have a slim margin of time--sometimes days--before lack-of-work (LOW) notice. Although employees are expected to seek out their own opportunities, there is very little guidance or support to help match employees to open opportunities, and the Resource Management system intended to perform this function is understaffed. Even when securely on a contract, this emphasis on billable targets impedes career development as it encourages staff to stay put in minimal-growth opportunities for the sake of job security. Individual experiences vary significantly, however, because there is wide disparity in how teams manage their budgets and staff. It seems that a team's leadership has free reign to determine its own LOW policy and make other significant decisions impacting staff without Firm-wide guidance. Such leadership decisions tended to feel reactive rather than proactive and were often poorly communicated to staff.