Overall, my time at Chief Nation was enjoyable in some respects, particularly because of the friendships formed and the people worked with day to day. There was a strong bond with certain peers, and the shorter working week was a genuine benefit. However, there were several areas where the reality of the role and company culture did not align with what was communicated during the interview process.
From the beginning, the role and progression opportunities felt misleading. There appeared to be a pattern of hiring people with broader marketing backgrounds and positioning the role as having marketing elements, when in practice it was almost entirely focused on events and admin. This was a common sentiment shared among team members. The scope for progression within the company was very limited, and this was not made clear during interviews, despite growth and development being discussed.
Leadership was another area that felt challenging at times. Some senior team members were highly opinionated and tended to assert their views over others, including specialists within their own departments and, on occasion, even clients. There was also a lack of clarity around certain senior roles, with responsibilities often being passed down without transparency.
There were also inconsistencies in how expectations around working hours were applied. Senior management at times arrived late, left early, or worked irregular hours, yet expectations were later set for employees to arrive on time in order to set a good example for new starters. This felt misaligned, as leadership did not consistently model the behaviour that was being asked of the wider team.
The work itself became repetitive and limiting, particularly for those with broader experience. Many tasks were manual and could have been automated, yet processes remained rigid. The role was also very KPI focused, which is something not discussed in interviews. Individuals and teams were assessed heavily against KPIs while having limited control over outcomes due to strict processes.
Several expectations were not disclosed during the interview stage. This included the requirement to work irregular hours for virtual events based in the US, which at times meant staying awake until 3 am. Although time off in lieu was provided, this was disruptive to personal routines and should have been communicated with full transparency, as this could be a dealbreaker for some candidates. There were also concerns around privacy, as employees were required to share access to LinkedIn and Outlook accounts without this being clearly communicated upfront.
Some aspects of the company culture did not fully reflect how they were presented. While the four day working week did offer flexibility, flexibility around holidays and personal circumstances was inconsistent. Social events were infrequent and often poorly organised, which led to low attendance and reduced engagement.
There also appeared to be limited investment in employees. Expenses policies prioritised clients and guests, even when employees were travelling late at night after events. This gave the impression that employee wellbeing was not always a priority. Although diversity was frequently discussed, there were instances where individuals were treated unfairly without sufficient support from leadership.
While Chief Nation had some positive elements, particularly the working schedule and peer relationships, the company may not be the right fit for those seeking clear progression, skill development, or transparency.
