Cons
They put directors in charge of functions they don’t actually understand, then surround themselves with people who tell them what they want to hear instead of what the organization needs to hear. The result is predictable: poor decisions, endless bureaucracy, and little accountability.
They constantly talk about financial pressures while outsourcing work under the guise of “strategic partnerships” when it’s really about cutting costs. Cost reduction isn’t a strategy if you’re sacrificing capability, institutional knowledge, and long-term performance.
My biggest concern is that they’ll continue making the same mistakes across other business functions before realizing the damage they’ve done.
The organization has an extraordinary amount of tenure, but that’s not always a strength. Too often, poor performance is tolerated instead of addressed. Keeping low performers indefinitely while failing to invest in and reward high-performing talent creates unnecessary overhead and mediocrity. If they built teams around excellence instead of longevity, they’d likely achieve better results with fewer resources.
Unless you’re looking for a corporate environment where there is zero accountability, conversations go in circles and leadership is more focused on protecting its own agenda than making difficult decisions, I wouldn’t recommend spending your time here.
