CEO Not Focused on Future - Engineering Technician Black & Veatch Employee Review

1.0
Dec 6, 2022
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Black & Veatch has added an additional week of vacation starting at 3 weeks for incoming employees, while offering a 9/80 schedule.

Cons

The new CEO and executive leadership have completely done a 180 within the direction of the company by instituting a return to office plan, which back tracks on their "Work in New Ways" work profile, which offered the following profiles: Resident, Flex (Work 2 days in office, Work 3 days at home), Mobile and Virtual. The mobile work profile has been eliminated with no transparency, communication, or coordination to adapt to this change. There has not been any transparency of any metric to support their decision to backtrack on our current work profiles. The reasoning for this change was to force people to be in the office to build our culture. There appears to be a huge disconnect between executive leadership and the rest of the employees.

avatar
Black & Veatch Response
3y
Our ASPiRE principles remain the guiding force of our culture and connect us wherever in the world we sit. As a global company we always have and always will work virtually and need to continually adapt to stay ahead of technology, trends and client needs. The hybrid model is part of this adaptation - and a decision grounded in an effort to find better ways to collaborate.

Explore other reviews about Black & Veatch

5.0
Jul 15, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Great culture, flexibility, benefits and pay.

Cons

I do not have any. Great place to work.

1.0
Jul 2, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Fair starting compensation, the team I lead is very dedicated, the onboarding process is very smooth, there are opportunities to mentor and be mentored.

Cons

The current performance management process is deeply flawed. Leaders collect ratings from managers and supervisors, then gather in a room with peers to “calibrate.” During this meeting, a predetermined percentage of employees must receive low ratings. At one point, someone referred to this as “forced ratings,” and the IT leader became visibly upset, insisting that it was not. However, I was present for the discussion: we lowered ratings, checked the spreadsheet, lowered more ratings, checked the spreadsheet again, and repeated this cycle until we hit the percentage the IT leader said had to be met. From conversations with peers outside of IT, this appears to be a common practice across the organization. Unfortunately, the approach often results in employees receiving ratings that do not accurately reflect their actual performance. These artificially lowered ratings directly affect merit increases and bonuses—even if the bonuses are relatively small—creating consequences that feel at best unfair. Regardless of what label is used, the experience felt undeniably forced.

1
See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All