Pros
I came to ICON through one of their many acquisitions in the years before my departure and, while employed there, I worked in a few different roles across multiple teams. My original company was kept, more or less, together as a group/department under a larger division of ICON, and this seemed to be their approach to the other acquisitions that occurred while I was there. All that to say: A review of just ICON is difficult. Depending on what part of the company you're hired onto, the staff, culture, and attention/support given to you by ICON can vary a great deal. Most of my day-to-day experience was positive. This was due in large part to the outstanding people I worked with . Across the many teams I worked on, only one had a bad dynamic. The overall culture was welcoming and supportive, but this felt more due to the established culture from the original company--not ICON. My managers, of multiple levels, all made me feel supported except for the aforementioned "bad dynamic" team. The pay, insurance, and other benefits were quite good for most of my time at ICON. Insurance and 401k matching were competitive with the industry, and PTO was generous as was the remote work requirements. As for salary, I was paid a good rate per industry, but I was in the minority.
Cons
As stated in my "Pros" section, I came to ICON by way of an acquisition. During my time with the company after that, it seemed like ICON struggled to integrate acquired companies into their established processes. The "growing pains" resulted in layoffs, mismanagement, and folks quitting in response to both and other points of pain. My impression then and now is ICON's management has little interest in learning what internal processes and dynamics made acquired companies successful. Instead, ICON expects teams to continue performing as successfully as they did prior to being acquired while conforming to ICON's standards--no matter how different those standards and processes may be from what made the company a success previously. The other large con I saw first hand was ICON's focus on metrics causing them to lose sight of what drives those metrics--the people doing the work. Bad managers were not dealt with so long as their accounts generated profit, no matter how bad turnover was under said manager. Teams were expected to maintain goals, despite turnover on team or loss of support functions and clients outside of the team's control. There were more than one townhall where upper management excitedly told us the company was posting profits, but bonuses and yearly increases would need to be reduced.
