Beleaguered by office politics - Senior Consultant InfoTrust Employee Review

* If you're a true analyst, exercise some of your skills looking at the Glassdoor reviews. You'll probably notice a few things: 1.) Good reviews come in surges. 2.) Good reviews often cite specific things mentioned in bad reviews. 3.) Bad reviews are naturally spaced chronologically. This is because it is commonplace in mandatory meetings and managerial oversight to populate these surveys. You will be pressed into leaving reviews, some of which the company will have the means to monitor your individual contribution. Also make sure you pay attention to the responses from the company. * When I was there, bonuses were tied to NPS scores and my manager actively advocated for NOT surveying clients who you would likely give a lower score. We were incentivized with our bonus to be "strategic" with how we gathered data on those surveys. * As other reviews mentioned, there are a TON of meetings. Mandatory, non-billable, meetings. When you have a billable hours quota this becomes a real problem. * Senior leadership is heavily invested in following Tony Robbins. Uncomfortably so. * InfoTrust is politically active and there will be quite a few meetings around those agendas. It's a noble effort and while I found my beliefs aligned with those at the company I also belonged to demographics frequently seen on the opposing side which made some of my interactions extremely awkward to the point where I felt it affected my professional standing with the company. * These causes become a bit of a flavor of the month situation where there will be meetings discuss or participate. While never directly labeled as "mandatory" there is definitely pressure to be involved and say the right thing. * It is common for individuals championing internal causes and efforts (Women's wage disparity, racism, etc.) to be elevated in position, given high visibility projects, and given credit for its success over the skill team members that execute on those projects. * Their inclusiveness can be unethically exclusive. Example: there was women "lean in" while I was there. I don't think a mens' lean in would've gone over well with the company. * The health insurance was paid for as a benefit, which was nice, however it didn't cover what my family medically needed so I had to acquire an outside source of insurance which was much more costly as I was not going through my employer. This was brought to the attention of the company and not addressed. * Unlimited time off, but poor coverage while you're away. Since promotions aren't skill based (more who you know) that means your boss doesn't have the ability to cover your position while you're away. Every time during my tenure taking time away created an incident on my account which I was left to bear the burden of resolving and ultimately left holding the blame. * The core value of "ownership" has been completely corrupted within this organization and being used by management to defer blame for problems that occur. I have been chastised by leadership for not owning the solution to an incident created by another consultant, within a product I do not know or have access to, run by a department I do not belong to, discussed in a meeting I was not invited to. * Two of my three managers were "yes" people both internally and to the clients. If I asked my manager to step in and help me manage a client, they would overpromise and overcommit to the client so the client was happy with the answers, leaving me to deal with the unachievable result. Meanwhile my accomplishments were accredited to the managers leadership. My contributions were woefully misrepresented by my direct leadership.