GIC reviews

Where do I start? A complete and utter mess and HR will not help you in anyway and they too will not follow proper due process and force you out when tasked to by your manager. Do not come if you’re not a scholar as they’re almost guaranteed a path to the top. Do not come especially if mid career as you’re unlikely to last long without the right management support and get terminated for low performance with no justification.

Like many reviewers have shared here, there are genuine structural concerns within the Technology department worth raising constructively. On leadership and appointments: There is a perception that some leadership selections have not been merit-based, which has affected team morale and confidence. This is across TG, not limited to a particular team or division. With new leadership coming in, the hope is that appointments going forward prioritize capability and that the incoming Director of Technology makes decisions grounded in competency rather than familiarity and favourites. On BMO and PMO: Both functions appear to have narrowed significantly in scope. What were once analytical and advisory roles have shifted toward coordination and message-passing. The Chinese expression 一问三不知 — meaning an inability to answer even basic questions — reflects a gap that is hard to ignore. Governance frameworks and process papers have been introduced with good intent, but execution has not kept pace, and there are instances where teams cannot address questions about their own processes. This is an area that clearly needs investment and capable leadership. On Change Management (CM): The CM function is critically under-resourced — operating with just two people and no senior lead. As a result, the team has been reduced to communications drafting rather than higher-value work such as impact analysis and change readiness. This is a resourcing and prioritisation issue that deserves attention. On HR: HR's strategic contribution has been difficult for many colleagues to identify. Feedback from those who have engaged with the function suggests a lack of independent perspective, which limits its effectiveness as a business partner. On recent leadership changes in Infrastructure: The transition appears to have been driven by a genuine need to uplift capability. The frustration in the organisation appear to stem from how certain senior appointments were handled — where perceived gaps in contribution have reflected poorly on the broader function and, by extension, on those who made the appointments. The underlying talent in this organisation is real. These observations are shared in the hope that incoming leadership takes an honest look at structure, resourcing, capability and how roles are filled — and uses this moment as an opportunity to set the department up for success.