Pros
The biggest pro is its potential. With the right president and board; proper HR oversight and practices, including holding senior management accountable and better staff retention by appreciating talent; and a more positive, less fearful environment, the ASPCA could truly be an impactful organization for animals nationwide. The ASPCA IS very mission-driven and I've never seen donations being wasted. (In fact, they keep cutting back staff benefits.) The real waste is the lost time and energy as a result of poor decision making. Another pro is the hard working and competent staff across the organization that do their best to help animals despite the various internal challenges undermining them.
Cons
I agree with much of the cons below. Just to reiterate some: utter disrespect and lack of appreciation for talented staff; favoritism, sycophancy, back-stabbing, out-of-control egos, and House of Cards-style cutthroat politics from middle management on up; zero transparency and a culture of fear and retaliation; employee dismissal/layoff practices that are devoid of dignity; frequent upheaval of strategy and focus based on the president and board's changing whims; lack of cooperation and cohesiveness between departments and sometimes within; and fear of and deference to the unqualified yet arrogant president, which keeps all the good senior staff from attempting to change anything listed above. I also like what a colleague said about the inane core values, and I 100% concur with the multiple statements about lack of diversity, which is truly despicable and unfathomable, and I'd also like to point out the blatant ageism. For those of you who are still considering applying here, also consider that there is practically no time off, no work/life balance, and no perks or tokens of appreciation (e.g. the occasional lunch, a holiday party, etc.). The pay is ok depending on the department, and the ASPCA is good resume fodder, but expect to work very hard for incompetent people who won't appreciate you.
