Bad Culture - Anonymous employee Elanco Employee Review

2.0
22 June 2022
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

There are some amazing people who are passionate about the animal health industry

Cons

Poor leadership with very short term reactions and priorities - not focusing on long term stability and growth

avatar
Elanco Response
3y
Thank you for your continued commitment of over 9 years and sharing our passion for the health of animals. We understand that working to position our company as a long-term leader in the growing global animal health market can be challenging for employees and leaders. We recommend viewing our Investor Day materials from last year, offering a transparent look into our long-term business goals. Elanco continues to focus on industry growth, targeting ~3-4% average annual revenue growth.

Explore other reviews about Elanco

5.0
30 June 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Treats interns well by providing PTO during the summer shut down

Cons

Didn't really have any issues with the internship.

2.0
20 Feb 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Plenty of great, passionate coworkers who work hard and collaborate. I had a lot of professional flexibility and my job was always interesting. Process teams on the manufacturing floor is a great system. Offsite resources, especially technical experts, are great.

Cons

Expect to be firefighting constantly and frequently fighting against an aging facility and outdated processes. No unified vision or clear prioritization from management. Misalignment between site leadership and upper/off-site management created sustained operational friction and stress for employees. Leadership turnover was frequent, contributing to ongoing instability. Because of all this, there was a super low morale and a feeling of widespread fatigue. Inconsistent communication and decision-making standards contributed to a low-trust culture, including regular informal discussion of colleagues and unprofessional and sometimes intimidating behavior in meetings. Performance feedback and perceived value were highly dependent on shifting leadership dynamics rather than consistent, objective criteria. Employees could move from being strongly supported to heavily criticized with little change in actual performance. Although a nine-box review process was supposedly used, individual outcomes were not transparently shared with employees. Onboarding and training for specialized roles were underdeveloped. Compensation was just fine for workload and scope of responsibility.

1
See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All