Human Rights Last - not living internally by the values espoused externally
Pros
The Refugee protection program and team does truly important work. The national security team is strong. There is good expertise at the director level. There are many smart people. There is a new CEO who may infuse new momentum. (The previous CEO was also someone who was respected in the community, so this is not a critique of her.)
Cons
2018 was a terrible year for the organization - financially, for morale, and for reputation. Things had been relatively positive until that point - although clearly the organization was not financially stable. When times are tough, you can either motivate people and double down on your principles and values - or you can create a Darwinian system where you allow people to be disrespected, enable narcissism to be used as a management principle, and sexism concerns to go unaddressed. Employees were not (all) very treated well during a period of upheaval and layoffs. Doors were shut, heads were held down. When concerns were raised in particular about certain people in senior management, e.g. a member of the exec team's harsh and inexperienced management of staff from interns up to directors, the paraphrased message given was that being a bad manager and being mean were not disqualifying characteristics. And, if cruel management tactics delivered results, perhaps there would be a rationale. But, in a human rights organization people generally (correctly) expect to be treated with kindness and respect. I saw how harsh tactics made people freeze and become less productive.
