An excellent company for "below average" people. - Executive Consultant CGI Employee Review

2.0
Apr 24, 2014
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

- It's a good company if you are not a very smart person and not fit for companies like IBM, Accenture, Google, etc. - Generous pay if you are white or worship big bosses

Cons

CGI might be a great company, but following observations are based on my experiences in some of the US offices: - Treat "non white" employees as workers and will never give them senior management positions. - Most of the people are average or below average. They are not qualified to successfully deliver large custom software development projects. - Most of their success stories are on the projects where they were sub to companies like IBM and Accenture. - Some of the US offices are run like family owned businesses. Not very professional. - No a process oriented company. I think CGI is a CMMI level 3 company. - And many more when I compare CGI with similar companies. Bottom line - Do not join CGI if you are a smart person and believe in innovation. Do not expect good salary raises and/ or promotion if you are not white or close to senior management.

Explore other reviews about CGI

5.0
Jul 16, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Great work life balance and great people

Cons

Low starting pay compared to other companies

1.0
Jun 16, 2026
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

no specific positives to highlight from my perspective

Cons

I worked at CGI in both India and the USA and observed similar workplace culture concerns across both locations. The only real difference was HR—India HR felt more supportive, while my experience with USA HR was disappointing. My employment ended shortly after maternity leave due to an alleged “lack of projects,” which I experienced as a layoff. I also observed what appeared to be misuse of position by some leaders, including blurred professional boundaries, preferential treatment, and expectations that went beyond normal workplace roles—at times resembling personal-assistant-style demands rather than professional conduct. Surprisingly, I also noticed inconsistent “policies” applied differently to different individuals. In some cases, it felt like the rules changed depending on who you were. When leadership became aware that someone was related to another employee in the organization, it sometimes felt like that person was singled out or targeted rather than treated objectively. Overall, these practices—whether through inconsistent treatment, perceived power misuse, or favoritism—undermine trust, damage workplace culture, and raise serious concerns about fairness and professionalism.

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All