Overburdened and Underserved by Leadership
Pros
Bright and helpful colleagues in a variety of therapeutic areas, actually doing the work. Especially the veteran Emmes people, who remember what it was like prior to private equity and an overabundance of "leadership",
Cons
Like so many others, my time at Emmes was an experience, growing with the company from around six hundred or so employees through seven acquisitions of often poorly vetted companies. The company is severely overburdened or top-heavy, with an excessive number of executives for a CRO of 1,500 employees. Most notably, an inexplicable and as of yet unexplained need for three CEOs - two in Veridix and one overseeing the CRO. This, along with a split and duplication of SVP-level executives or senior roles like Presidents for the biopharma and public sector groups creates confusion and an ironically laughable lack of direction, ultimately hindering the streamlined or efficient operations and these senior leaders claim to support. Beyond poor leadership structuring, Emmes has repeatedly demonstrated a pattern of obfuscation and dishonesty, particularly when it comes to workforce decisions. Senior executives have claimed to value transparency and approachability, yet their actions tell a different story. Layoffs or RIFs have been mishandled time and time again. Emmes hadn't laid off a soul through numerous federal sequestrations and budget shutdowns throughout it's nearly 50-year history but suddenly had significant reductions in staffing after being passed between two private equity firms, leading to the current three-CEO debacle. Misleading communications left employees blindsided and unsupported rather than informed. With their grandly named reductions, aka "Project Propel", obviously planned in advance, they thought of no way to transition the responsibilities from those who were departing to the few remaining, and even left some sponsors wondering what happened when some employees were terminated in the middle of meetings. Their continued lack of forthrightness fosters a culture of uncertainty, distrust and fear or retaliation, making it difficult for employees to feel secure, and certainly not valued. For professionals, particularly in the clinical research space seeking an organization which truly prioritizes integrity, clarity and stability in these uncertain times, I would strongly recommend looking anywhere other than Emmes. Until New Mountain restructures its leadership and the organization aligns its actions with its named claim - Emmes, quite literally translating to "truth" - this once lauded and recognizable CRO will continue to struggle with credibility internally and externally. How can Emmes call itself the first native digital and AI-specialty CRO when it's own executives can't even manage to start a conference call without technical difficulties? Perhaps this claim is owned by the executives and senior leaders who use AI to craft their messages, especially throughout Veridix, business development, delivery and quality roles? Surely if AI can script your meetings and respond to your emails, your own roles could be "streamlined" as they too are redundant? Please, do explain to all of us, both former and current employees, what justifies such a small organization needing three CEOs with the commensurate salaries and perks? If I were a sponsor, an audit of Emmes' work would be a top priority - especially with the turnover. Emmes' continued devaluing and demeaning of "legacy" employees leaves too few employees who can tell the story and put together the pieces of the trial as conducted to host a competent inspection. In recent communications with the "Quality" group, there's no sense of urgency or need of timely responses to questions of some importance, and the responses from the most senior members seem AI-generated.
