Rather a mixed bag - Anonymous employee Wood Mackenzie Employee Review

2.0
1 July 2018
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Bright, eager, younger analysts; collaborative culture; strong historic market position, good reputation; long-standing client list; rich, deep, historical data; parent company is providing capital for growth; first class benefits; fresh, modern offices; many generous, UK-originated HR policies

Cons

Market reputation is faltering; intensifying competition is taking its toll; penetration into new markets is not well thought out; opaque company strategy ("WoodMac 2.0"), not fully understood at all levels; hazy alignment with Verisk; cumbersome, reluctant decision-making, slow responses; weak integration of acquisitions; erosion of subject matter expertise; very dated IT infrastructure; cumbersome client-user interfaces; short-sighted opex control Small company culture is quickly eroding; highly disruptive levels of employee turnover; widely varied employee satisfaction (non-UK offices, & downstream business segments are much lower); plum international jobs mostly go to UK expats; gender imbalance at senior levels; shambolic regional sales & marketing, totally consumed by their CRM processes

avatar
Wood Mackenzie Response
7y
Appreciate the feedback. We’re really focused on growing the business and, as you say, we have talented people here who advise blue chip clients across the oil, gas, mining, metals, chemicals and of course renewables sectors. In terms of the vision we are working on getting everyone behind our bold ambitious 2.0 plan which will transform our company and improve what we can offer clients. There is much to do and we are excited about our future.

Explore other reviews about Wood Mackenzie

5.0
31 May 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Good work life balance and interesting work

Cons

Nothing much to say on this.

3.0
15 June 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Appreciated working with smart, driven colleagues; they were truly experts in their fields. The rigorous schedules we were on were strictly maintained, which usually made for a very organized structure and workload.

Cons

Leadership went through many changes and acquisitions while I was there. The mission seemed to keep changing, and it wasn't easy to maintain consistency in our reports with such leadership changes. Market analysts were often pulled onto consulting projects but were not paid as consultants. This is what pushed me to leave.

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All