Not Advisable for Professionals Who Value Their Mental Health
Pros
Nothing that I can think of. Yes! Peers are fine but again, subjected to harsh realities of the workplace.
Cons
IORA has worked in important areas of environment, sustainability, and nature-based solutions, but my experience inside the organisation was not what I would associate with a mature research or policy institution. The internal working environment often felt shaped by hierarchy, informal power centres, and personal equations, rather than by consistent professional systems or the strength of technical contribution. The organisation does not always create enough room for independent thinking. Ideas that question the dominant view, even when they come from project experience, sectoral knowledge, or careful analysis, may not receive the attention they deserve. This can be difficult for professionals whose work depends on evidence, debate, and honest technical review. Another concern was the extent of control exercised over professional outputs. At times, even minor pieces of writing or individual sentences appeared to be closely directed by senior leadership, leaving limited room for technical staff to apply their own judgement, writing style, or subject expertise. Such micromanagement can reduce ownership, slow down work, and discourage professionals from developing independent analytical confidence. One of the more troubling aspects was the way recognition appeared to be distributed. Those who remained unquestioningly aligned with senior leadership (the highest-ranking position) often seemed to advance more easily, while people who brought a different perspective or raised substantive concerns could gradually be pushed to the margins. This discourages intellectual honesty and weakens the quality of institutional learning. There also seemed to be limited investment in structured feedback, mentoring, and career progression. Long-serving professionals may not always receive clear performance discussions, transparent growth pathways, or adequate institutional acknowledgement for their contributions. For an organisation operating in a knowledge-intensive field, this is a serious gap. Internal processes could also be more transparent and predictable. Matters related to recruitment, roles, compensation, communication, and exits would benefit from clearer systems and less dependence on informal decision-making. Professionals entering the organisation with expectations of openness, stability, and research-led management may find the environment difficult to navigate. Also, you tend to get messages and calls from senior management even at midnight (specially if they are travelling and have nothing much to do) Overall, IORA may suit people who are comfortable working within a strongly top-down structure and are okay with yes sir culture. However, professionals looking for intellectual independence, evidence-led decision-making, transparent systems, and genuine respect for technical expertise may find the organisation challenging.
