The Broad Institute reviews

1) There will almost certainly be no career growth or professional development if you are a non-scientist (by official title). In fact, in my experience if people take action to influence you professionally, then they are probably more likely to actively work against your career growth/development or at best, passively promote it. If I want growth I think I likely need to leave and work someplace else. They had a “Glint Survey” which is an employee survey and they openly discussed survey results. There were green and red marks, but the largest mark which was red was on “Career” suggesting that many people think that there is not much room for career growth and so that my assessment/conclusion is seemingly not dis-similar from others. This is consistent with many GlassDoor reviews too. 2) In my experience, if you are a non-scientist then the work assigned is work that nobody wants to do. The undesirable work makes the job unenviable. Someone else wrote in a review “The environment is not nourishing if….you are a non-scientist.” and I very very much agree. This is also terrible for professional development and feels regressive not progressive. 3) Salary is below average; this is seemingly well-known(see other reviews). 4) Insularity. Most groups both official (departments, groups, floors, etc.) and non-official (groups who congregate for some non-official reason) seem mostly stick to themselves. I guess this isn’t abnormal in organizations, but I didn’t expect it when I started given my previous impressions of Broad. I think the more “scientist” types, being in “ivory towers” want to stay away from non-scientist types. I don’t think that explains all the insularity however. The practical implication from insularity is that networking (and therefore professional growth) is more difficult or impossible. Another review mentioned nepotism; I have perceived some as well. 5) They often have food! Sometimes though it seems to me like they’re trying to pay people by “food currency”....which feels somewhat condescending. 6) The frequent scientific talks/discussions remind me of what I don’t get to participate in or am prohibited from participating in 7) Broad seems to make a point of its “culture” - nice, friendly people and all. However, “niceness” neither equates to “professional development” nor “pays the bills”. In my experience, being nice for professional development and networking will make the niceness disappear in others very quickly. I guess this sort of thing is normal in large corporations; I did not expect it at Broad before working for it.