NOT a top talent destination - Anonymous employee Black & Veatch Employee Review

1.0
Jun 5, 2024
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

lower and middle level employees

Cons

Everyone in leadership besides the CFO. The current CEO, Mario Azar, has a dictator / my way or the highway style of leadership which is counterintuitive into building a winning culture and attracting top talent. This style of leadership also leads to missing out on true value contribution from employees and top performers. This type of leadership style may work in Asia but here in the USA, people highly value freedom and privacy - which is the last thing you will feel B&V values if you are to accept a job here. Go work somewhere where they actually value you as a professional. B&V will treat you like a child and track and report you to your supervisor if you are not sitting at your desk for 8 hours each day you are in the office. They also use ESOP as an employee retention strategy as you do not become fully vested until year 6 of your employment. During these 6 years, they are able to give the you bare minimum bump in pay rather than keeping up with market rates / having to worry about you leaving / having to compete with other employers to pay you a fair market rate.

avatar
Black & Veatch Response
2y
As a former BV professional, we thank you for taking time to share your personal feedback. We're sad to hear of your sentiments in so many areas and we'll be sure to pass them along. Good luck in your future endeavors.

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