Steer Away - Information Security Analyst Texas Capital Employee Review

1.0
Oct 3, 2023
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Salary is alright. Cant think of anything.

Cons

The department and the team I am in lacks a well qualified management. It is run like a mom and pops business. Alarming lack of professionalism from the leadership. People that are friends with management will outlast people that actually do the job. Micromanagement. This is a bank and is run like a bank even if you are in a non-banking tech department. There is no work life balance. No flexibility. People have to ask for permission to leave 15 minutes early. This very likely depends on your leadership but this is what I have experienced. Overall, this is not really an employer that values its employees that much. Very penny pinching approach. dont want to spend money on training. or anything besides salary. You exepect to go to a tech conference while working here? Forget it. Flexibility? what is that? There is no culture. I would not recommend this place to anyone.

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