Pros
Great benefits; some smart, interesting people work within the company; great cafeteria. International locations. Company looks shiny and pretty to outsiders. Company does not waver from core values, and "stays the course" with investment philosophy even in tough economical times. CEO has lunch with employees periodically and seems to take an interest in employees. Beautiful building and comfortable (physical) environment. Pay is above average.
Cons
Extremely political, corporate culture pits departments and employees against each other. Poor communication between middle management and employees. Immature company with growing pains that hires competent (even the best) people to help grow the company, but seems completely uninterested in making things run more efficiently. No direct communication; much employee feedback is second- or third-hand information, and almost never delivered by the person having an issue with the employee (have observed this in multiple departments...seems to be related to corporate culture). Management holds onto negative information, doesn't address it in a timely fashion, and doesn't share it with responsible parties until situations have escalated and jobs are on the line. Proactive problem solving is not the norm. Underling employees serve as a "life support system" for PhDs, "Regional Directors" and "Vice Presidents," and are treated as "expendable." Titles are a big deal, and if you don't have the "right" title, people literally won't talk to you. There are many "VPs", and there is brutal competition to attain this rank. Communication channels are not clear, and if you overstep the secret boundaries, you'll get your hand slapped. Culture is very "cloak and dagger," with many mini-meetings that exclude people who should be included in decision making, frequently vilifying one employee who is ceremoniously sacrificed in order to appease management. It's completely acceptable to walk all over others and destroy their careers in order to advance within the company, and it's impossible to know who to trust. With little turnover in the long-term employees, there are many secret political connections which are impossible to navigate while remaining productive and upbeat. Many employees feel a great sense of job insecurity and walking on eggshells with little positive feedback. Some PhDs are incapable of accepting feedback, suggestions, and the work of non-PhDs, targeting the non-PhDs for termination if they make suggestions that cast the PhD as anything but the expert. When things go wrong, an employee is targeted and blamed for things they may not have even been involved in. Corporate culture feels like an episode of "The Apprentice" or "Survivor," with employees being voted "off the island" by others who are completely unaware of an individual employee's day-to-day performance. I saw another review which cited "team culture" with long-term employees, and I did not find that to be the case at all...even when there is a sense of team within a workgroup, I have seen management intervene and disparage a member of the group, turning others against them and destroying the cohesiveness of the team. I have worked for larger, well-established companies in the past, and I have NEVER seen this. Also, your educational credentials must be "pretty." Some of my colleagues cited feeling like second-class citizens because they didn't get their degree, MBA, or other advanced degree from the "right" university. Dimensional is very big on outward appearances. HR claims to have an open-door policy, but the political environment means you're putting your neck on the chopping block if you try to give feedback. Many employees cite not being able to trust HR in employee relations issues (they are great with benefits, though). Semi-annual review process is easily manipulated and completely ineffective, and allows for personal bias on the part of the supervisor or manager.