Was a great practice/company, going downhill - Support Teammate Radiology Partners Employee Review

2.0
Mar 1, 2021
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Senior leadership is inspiring, visionary, and forward thinking about healthcare (Except new IT leadership). Practice used to be a place with huge talent, people wanting to do better/more with less. New office was nice addition (N/A because of COVID). Weekly happy hours on Friday (no more because of COVID). Leadership does a good job with diversity, COVID education, initiatives of doing good in the world.

Cons

Pay used to be at market, now well below market. Merit increases are small (1-2%). A great talented company with high upside has attracted a horde of mediocre "can't do it" employees (IT + RCM). IT leadership is laughable and has brought people with big titles that don't do anything for the organization (things have gotten worse since their arrival). This company/practice is top heavy. Lots of Directors/VP/SVPs, not enough people doing the work. Incompetent people get promoted all of the time. A sure way that will lead to many talented employees to leave.

Explore other reviews about Radiology Partners

5.0
May 19, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Flexibility and work life balance

Cons

Nothing I could think of.

avatar
Radiology Partners Response
1mo
Thank you, for taking the time to share a thoughtful review. We, too, believe that RP is a great place to work. We are grateful you are part of the team as we work together to transform radiology!
2.0
Jul 20, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Strong immediate team, talented technical peers, and meaningful enterprise technology challenges. I worked here for 16 years, and the best part of the job was consistently the people closest to the work. My direct team and direct leadership were supportive, capable, and genuinely cared.

Cons

The last six years were very different from the first ten. Senior leadership alignment has been a persistent issue, with unclear ownership, overlapping initiatives, conflicting architecture direction, and organizational tension that often flows down to delivery teams. Growth opportunities did not feel transparent. I was in grade for approximately four years despite increasing responsibility, and at least one promotion opportunity felt predetermined rather than genuinely open to internal candidates. Compensation also became a factor. Raises did not keep pace with inflation or responsibility, full target bonuses were not achieved, benefits costs increased, and retirement contribution value declined. The biggest issue was the gap between architecture titles and actual authority. Platform and Azure architects were often not asked to define problems, evaluate options, or design solutions. Instead, decisions were frequently shaped elsewhere by vendors, consultants, or senior leadership, and internal teams were asked to implement or adapt them. That is closer to senior engineering than architecture. When internal teams raised concerns about governance, security, supportability, or long-term architecture standards, those concerns could be treated as roadblocks rather than responsible technical stewardship.

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All