FTI Consulting reviews

Systemic Favoritism in Staffing: Managing Directors (MDs) and Senior Managing Directors (SMDs) consistently prioritize their preferred employees for assignments, leaving others with low utilization. This directly impacts year-end evaluations and limits access to bonuses, creating frustration for those sidelined. A significant downside was the lack of constructive feedback from senior leadership. Instead of receiving guidance and coaching, interns were often subjected to unprofessional confrontations with Senior Managing Directors, which created a hostile and unproductive learning environment. Hollow Leadership Promises: Leadership claims favoritism doesn’t exist, but these assurances lack substance. Employees outside the inner circles of MDs/SMDs struggle to gain recognition, receiving average or below-average ratings despite delivering high-quality work. Illusory Autonomy: Management states employees can decline assignments they’re uninterested in or outside expert areas, but doing so often leads to retaliation. MDs/SMDs may hold grudges, excluding those who exercise this supposed freedom from future opportunities. Opaque Terminations: When employees are let go, the reasons are rarely communicated clearly, reflecting a severe lack of transparency from HR and business leadership. This leaves affected employees confused and unsupported. Unfair Performance Disputes: When employees challenge unfair project ratings with HR, leadership typically prevails, sidelining the concerns of working staff. This further erodes trust in the evaluation process. Stagnant Career Growth: Promotions and performance ratings lack fairness and transparency. Employees not in favored groups face career stagnation, with limited opportunities for advancement or meaningful bonuses, regardless of their contributions.