Pros
Flexi arrangement though it depends on the superior
Kontras
Poor leadership with pple who can't manage to lead Poor performance staff who don't deliver are rewarded Reward not based on merit and performance but how well you please the management Poor consideration for staff
Pros
Good mission. Working level colleagues are ok, esp the newer ones. Loads of potential and opportunities. Good rotation of top leaders.
Kontras
Churn is high. Cant keep good people. Toxic management and culture. Long time managers guard turf like their lives. No respect by long timers to newer staff and management. Closed mindsets. Say that will try new things but never do. Competitive and not collaboratibve culture. Helping one another is espoused but when actually done is frowned upon as being too helpful, stepping outside your turf. Asking for ideas constantly, but ideas are often shot down and end up doing same things over and over. Poor reputation in the marketplace yet little done to change it and instead of tapping on a talented workforce, ideas are driven by lackeys chosen to achieve the goals of weak leaders. In the end, the culture is one of just do you job, dont do too much, dont say too much, dont try too hard, just enough is good enough.
Pros
There are still a handful of good and sincere people here, and the mission itself is meaningful. But whether you will thrive depends heavily on your department, reporting officer and tolerance for politics. Before joining, do proper research beyond the branding and mission statements. Ask yourself honestly whether you would be comfortable advocating for the organisation’s products and services.
Kontras
The sharp increase in 1–2 star Glassdoor reviews from 2015–2021 compared to 2022–2026 speaks volume about the direction this organisation seems to have taken in recent years. The place presents itself as mission-driven but many newer reviews paint a very different picture and they are not exaggerating. There feels a huge disconnect between stated values and the real internal culture. Ground staff engagement often feels superficial and favouritism is obvious. Visibility matters more than substance. Being better at “managing upwards” matters more than doing real work behind the scenes when it comes to progression. Endless “culture improvement” initiatives, engagement sessions and leadership chats, but little changes because the underlying behaviours seem to remain the same. Newer staff are often expected to be moulded into the existing culture rather than bring fresh perspectives. Which raises the question why even hire external talents? One of the more frustrating aspects of the culture is the strange sense of self-importance that exists in certain middle management individuals. Despite their limited viewpoints and less progressive thinking, some leaders carry themselves with an almost elitist or superior attitude just because they are part of the “movement”. Many long-serving staff sometimes seem completely detached from how healthy organisations outside actually function. New ideas are talked about often, but anything different is quietly shut down if it challenges existing mindsets or egos. What’s ironic is that an organisation advocating for workers can sometimes show very little empathy towards its junior staff… Gossip, judgment, passive aggressive behaviour may not be uncommon.