Just don’t unless you want to work for JPMC - Customer Relationship Associate Texas Capital Employee Review

2.0
Sep 4, 2023
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

The OGs of TCB are the biggest plus. Salary levels are decent/market. Benefits - same.

Cons

What started out as one of my favorite jobs ever turned into something I didn’t sign up for. Nor would I have had signed up had I known what only a few years would bring. To many levels of management; too many unappreciated hours; too many unrealistic expectations of meeting deadlines while managers sat idly by and did nothing to help. If you like burnout, TCB is perfect for you. I stayed longer than I should have because of my loyalty to the one who hired me. Bringing in a new CEO and big bank mentality was a huge mistake. But let it be known that nepotism and favoritism to personal friends is high on said CEO’s to-do list. All the personal customer service and relationship building abilities were lost in one fell swoop. It makes me sad and it makes me angry. The customers deserve more; the RM’s deserve more; the employees deserve more.

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