Improved processes but slow public sector projects
Pros
Having joined CGI through the BJSS acquisition, CGI introduced more formal processes around what was otherwise a startup that experienced growth faster than their processes could keep up. While BJSS were often oblivious to the fact that my project existed (or which project managers were responsible for which projects), CGI made it better known which projects existed around the estate. BJSS had many excellent engineers that cared about quality and there was a very good sense of community amongst the employees. I was well compensated and received bonuses under CGI. All of my managers were also excellent to work with and very supportive. They were "people" people, not solely business-focused managers.
Cons
There were years that I enjoyed working at BJSS and then the holes began to appear. Considering I aspired to work here for a very long time, I was a bit disappointed with how disorganised the business generally seemed. It was almost two separate entities operating as one. A function of switched on, engaged technical experts alongside internal business functions that struggled to operate effectively. I know I wasn't alone in this opinion. The most immediate thing to call out is that a lot of the work is typically with public secftor. This can be less than ideal if you care about being technically challenged as public sector is by far one of the slowest moving engagements you can be on. During my time there, senior CGI leadership accidentally emailed a CSV containing employees' full addresses to staff. I was one of the affected employees and was left with concerns about the company's handling of the incident. There seemed to be a general culture of pushing marketing and sales down to the engineers which also meant using your own personal profiles to promote the organisation. As part of my performance objectives, I was assessed in part on posting pro-CGI content on LinkedIn. Work-life balance is entirely down to you as an individual. BJSS/CGI didn't really grasp the concept. Aside from using personal accounts to promote the company, many of their "work/life balance" calls would take place during your personal time such as during lunch or before/after their core operating hours. Training was largely self-directed. In my experience, new responsibilities often came with little formal onboarding, and most learning happened by relying on colleagues facing a similar situation as well as figuring things out on projects. While nobody generally expects to have their hand held, some training is important for specific roles. This largely reflects the BJSS world and improved under CGI. The interview process was inconsistent. I put somebody forward for an engineering position and they were grilled on a subject matter that was unrelated to the role type, then rejected because they didn't have the answers to that subject matter. Different interviewers appeared to assess candidates very differently, and I saw candidates rejected for reasons that didn't seem closely aligned with the role. Other interviewers were aware of this and made a point to pair up with certain interviewers to ensure candidates weren't being unfairly dismissed. I was never benched so I can't speak as to the experiences but I do know that CGI introduced more formality around this. You will be let go if you've been benched for 3 months. It is your responsibility to find an engagement. Having been a project manager and been through the processes of choosing project members based on cost, in my view, it's easier to look on LinkedIn for an external job.
