Going downhill real fast - AVP-Analyst Texas Capital Employee Review

1.0
May 15, 2021
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Awesome coworkers. Most of the people are great. That’s the main reason I stayed for 7 years. Good benefits

Cons

The new CEO is terrible. He has the charisma of a bus station bathroom stall. He is making very bad decisions. I think he is just using this company as a stepping stool. He is going to sell the company so he can add that to his resume. And then he will leave, making other people clean up his mess. His public speaking abilities are nonexistent. At the first townhall he was bragging about the company’s diversity. In his own words: “I have two black women working for me”. Who says something like that??!! He doesn’t have a clue what’s going on around him. Our business continuity team came up with an alternative work arrangement policy last year. As soon as the new ceo started, he cancelled it. And the business continuity group just rolled over and agreed without any arguments. Grow a pair guys. I already gave my two weeks’ notice, so none of this affects me. But I made some very good friends at TCB, and I feel bad for them. Good luck everyone!

Explore other reviews about Texas Capital

5.0
Apr 23, 2026
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Pays well for hard work

Cons

Nothing it is a great firm

1.0
Mar 5, 2026
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Some talented engineers and team members who try to do the right thing despite constant organizational friction.

Cons

The technology organization suffers from a lack of strong engineering leadership and accountability. Managers often avoid making firm technical or project decisions, which leads to shifting priorities and unclear direction. When initiatives struggle, responsibility is frequently pushed downward onto engineers rather than addressed at the leadership level. There has also been noticeable turnover across engineering teams while leadership continues pushing a model where only a small number of onshore “lead engineers” remain while much of the development work moves offshore. In practice this creates bottlenecks where engineers complete work during normal hours but cannot move code forward until offshore teams review and approve pull requests. Leadership has also introduced initiatives without realistic planning. When internal AI tooling was introduced, expectations around productivity were abruptly changed (for example, reducing story point estimates under the assumption AI would accelerate development). At the same time, engineering resources were directed toward building an internal AI assistant that largely functions as a wrapper around existing models while higher-priority platform work remains under-resourced. Culturally, the environment can feel dismissive toward engineers. Turnover remains high, concerns raised by teams are rarely addressed, and negative feedback about the organization has been consistent for years without meaningful change from upper management.

1
See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All