Pros
The people you work with, not leadership though.
Cons
Compensation is not competitive with the market. In my experience, pay is at least $10,000 below industry standards for comparable roles and responsibilities.
Leadership lacks transparency, and communication is often inconsistent. Employees are not always given clear or honest explanations for decisions, making it difficult to trust leadership.
Career growth feels inconsistent and heavily dependent on who your manager is rather than on performance. Some employees receive promotions on a near-yearly basis, while others with strong performance wait four to five years for similar opportunities. The criteria for advancement are not communicated clearly, creating the perception that promotions are not applied equitably.
Within my team, favoritism has been a recurring issue. High-visibility projects are repeatedly assigned to the same individuals, some employees are excluded from relevant email chains or discussions, and recognition does not always reflect actual contributions. This creates an environment where opportunities are not distributed fairly.
The management style is highly micromanaged. There is little autonomy to approach problems creatively or introduce new ideas because projects are expected to be completed one specific way. Employees are expected to execute rather than innovate, which limits professional growth and engagement.