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.