Deceptive Leadership - Engineer Black & Veatch Employee Review

2.0
Dec 15, 2022
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Knowledgable people. Work isn't intense. Stable environment.

Cons

The new CEO continuously touted working from home as a benefit separating BV from its competitors. We hired people with the lure of working remotely. Now he's forcing everyone to return to the office 3 days a week even though 90% of BV employees want to remain virtual. With the new reorganization, the sales teams are abandoning smaller divisions in favor of larger divisions. Therefore, there is no longer a steady stream of long billable projects to work on unless you're in a big division. Finally, BV recently forced everyone to purchase BV stock as their 401k contributions as opposed to investing in other funds. You are forced to be an owner.

avatar
Black & Veatch Response
3y
We know this is a change, but our goal is to help make the transition as easy as possible. Our Hybrid model offers professionals the ability to work from home/virtually 2 days a week. Employees in the field will remain virtual. And for those with special circumstances, we will do our best to find the right solution. Everyone will not return to the office 3 days a week beginning in January, as we are taking a tiered approach for many professionals so they have time to prepare for this transition over the next few months.

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