Chickens with their heads cut off - Anonymous employee Texas Capital Employee Review

1.0
Apr 15, 2024
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Everyone is not awful however people will do anything to stay off the naughty list and won’t make waves in fear of their jobs.

Cons

HR is incompetent. Most of the HRBPs act like high school girls. Everyone is passive aggressive and they want you to kiss up to them or they will run to the CHRO and put a bug in their ear to start a plan to get someone fired. This company has a lot of good, smart, innovative people but they hardly get exposure because their leaders steal their ideas and take everyone’s work as their own. Texas Capital Bank needs to gut their HR team and start over. Some are good but most are racism, lazy, rude, and like to act busy so they don’t have to do anything because they are in “meetings” all day everyday. Depending on who you are they let people get away with ANYTHING!! But if you are on the chopping block or a person of color anything can get you fired. They are good with it too. They don’t have real metrics the numbers they put out are FAKE! Survey info is fake or people don’t answer in fear they will be sought out and fired.

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