Pros
Exposure to a variety of clients, technologies, and business environments. Many talented individuals at different stages of their careers throughout the organization who genuinely wanted to improve things.
Cons
High turnover made it difficult to maintain consistency, retain institutional knowledge, and mature internal processes. Documentation standards were inconsistent, and efforts to improve them often struggled to gain lasting adoption across the organization. Resources were frequently stretched thin, placing additional pressure on existing staff while making long-term operational improvements difficult to sustain. Over time, this contributed to growing frustration and declining morale. The culture often felt more focused on discussion than execution. There were frequent meetings, conversations, and alignment efforts, but meaningful action and follow-through did not always keep pace. Priorities shifted regularly, direction could be inconsistent, and ownership was not always clearly defined, creating confusion and unnecessary rework. Leadership emphasized accountability and performance, but not always the support, resources, or organizational alignment needed to achieve those expectations successfully. Constructive feedback did not always appear to receive equal consideration, and influence often seemed tied to alignment with existing leadership perspectives and company culture. Overall, excessive bureaucracy, unclear ownership, inconsistent execution, and limited investment in sustainable process improvement made progress feel slower and more difficult than it needed to be.