To Board of Directors: Replace the New CEO - Estimator Black & Veatch Employee Review

2.0
Jan 7, 2023
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

The colleagues on my team are the best. Before the new CEO arrived, we had awesome morale, were highly productive, more profitable than ever, and were the best engineering firm to work for. Not any more.

Cons

The new CEO has been a nightmare for the company. FACT: Mario Azar decided on his own to change the working model of the company without agreement from the Board of Directors. The Board of Directors exists to ensure that the decisions that will impact the strength of the company have been thoroughly vetted. This did not occur and there has to be accountability. Mario Azar's reckless decision-making is negatively impacting BV's ability to retain and recruit top talent, which is our greatest asset. Morale and productivity are the lowest they have ever been in my career with BV.

avatar
Black & Veatch Response
3y
Thank you for sharing your review. As a professional who's been with us over 20 years, we can understand how passionate you'd be about this company and the changes we go through. We believe that a hybrid model is the right move right now for our company, our professionals, and our clients and that it will ultimately preserve the fabric and culture of B&V for future generations, and we appreciate your flexibility as we work together to evolve.

Explore other reviews about Black & Veatch

5.0
Jun 3, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Great team to work with in SCADA

Cons

Nothing to specify.. so far everything is good

avatar
Black & Veatch Response
1mo
Thank you for leaving a review! We appreciate the feedback!
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