Pros
One of the handful of cancer hospitals exempt from CMS's prospective payment system for acute hospitalizations, so MD Anderson makes a lot of money (taxpayers everywhere should be outraged) -- and the institution's leaders are effective at shielding this cash from the rest of the public University of Texas system. (Neither of these will last forever, however.) Salaries, as a result, tend to be higher and/or less subject to downward budgetary pressures than elsewhere. The workforce is incredibly diverse.
Cons
The marketing department has built a advertising campaign around giving patients false hope that MD Anderson is somehow different, better, and capable of curing cancers that are not curable. They justify this lack of integrity by stating that cancer patients have to go somewhere, so we might as well lure them here (i.e., the ends justify the means). MD Anderson has grown rapidly and has been unable to attract, retain, and promote leaders who can effectively design operational processes that work well under higher patient volumns. The operations are inefficient, byzantine, and frustrating for patients. I would never seek medical care here. The physicians on the front lines of patient care are engaged in a "ground war" with grossly overpaid and incompetent administrators, and with the institution's president, who is more interested in self-promotion than he is in building a world-class academic institution. Finally, the HR department could not possibly be any worse. They are literally walled off from the employee population in the administration building. Getting hired can take several months longer than it should -- even up to a year, depending on the position!