employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

The Nature Conservancy

Engaged Employer

Good mission does not equal great culture - Communications The Nature Conservancy Employee Review

2.0
Jan 11, 2021
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Large organization that has influence and resources, some really good people who care about conservation, good pay and benefits compared to other nonprofits

Cons

Extremely risk averse which can lead to paralysis when it comes to moving new initiatives forward, not open to new ideas or challenging status quo, behind the curve in addressing equity issues for BIPOC and women staff, ineffective managers abound yet have too much control, favoritism culture, very limited upward mobility, doesn’t address issues brought to leadership

avatar
The Nature Conservancy Response
5y
Thanks for writing your review. We’re passionate about strengthening our culture and and living our values of Commitment to Diversity and Respect for People, Communities, and Cultures. We may not be where we want to be as an organization yet and acknowledge this is a time of growth. Please contact us directly at recruiting@tnc.org so that we can learn more about your experience.

Explore other reviews about The Nature Conservancy

5.0
Jul 9, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Rewarding work, amazing people, beautiful sights, lots of free food

Cons

Long hard days, sweaty, tough if you have a family.

2.0
Jul 17, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Excellent benefits and access to programs, resources, and employee support that are often more comprehensive than what is available at smaller nonprofits.

Cons

There is a culture of sweeping problems under the rug to manage perceptions and avoid accountability. Many employees recognize that raising concerns about structural issues is unlikely to lead to meaningful change, which discourages people from speaking up. Managers and directors have incentives to protect their own interests rather than escalate serious problems, particularly when those issues reflect on their own leadership. In turn, senior leaders may be reluctant to address those management failures because they were responsible for hiring or promoting those managers in the first place. This creates a cycle where accountability is consistently avoided, allowing organizational dysfunction to persist. Recent restructuring decisions are a good example of these broader issues. During the North American marketing reorganization, some less qualified directors and managers were placed directly into their roles, while others were required to interview for essentially equivalent positions. Criteria such as geographic constraints were applied inconsistently across comparable roles, leaving employees with the impression that the process was neither transparent nor equitable. The resulting uncertainty and perceived unfairness have contributed to low morale, resentment, and reduced trust in leadership. Because they specialize in communications, marketing team members are especially skilled at framing or explaining away problems in ways that minimize their visibility to senior leadership, including the CMO. As a result, underlying issues often remain unaddressed until they become much larger problems.

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All