Pros
None that I saw so far.
Cons
The most damaging part of my experience here wasn’t the workload or the pressure. It was the complete erosion of trust at the supervisory level. The learning curve is steep, which is expected in advisory. What’s not expected is the absence of structured guidance. You are thrown into complex global contracts and client interactions with minimal clarity and then judged as though you’ve had years of context. Mentorship is discussed often, practiced rarely. There is a culture of saying what sounds good in the moment rather than standing by it. Transparency is selective. Accountability flows downward. When things go well, leadership absorbs the visibility. When things go wrong, responsibility finds the most junior person in the room. Psychological safety does not exist in environments where you have to document conversations just to protect yourself. Conversations that feel supportive one-on-one often take a different shape in larger forums. Context changes. Narratives evolve. You may leave a meeting thinking you have clarity, only to discover later that the story being told upward looks very different. If you are comfortable navigating political undercurrents and protecting your own narrative at all times, you may survive. If you value directness, consistency, and leadership that stands by its word, this environment will be exhausting. I do not recommend this organisation if you value your career.
