Pros
Upsides: The organization, somehow, is perceived very well externally, so will look good on your resume.
Cons
Useless, self-obsessed and myopic leadership, constantly changing priorities. Incomprehensible strategy. Organization bounces from crisis to crisis with no control of its own narrative. Work output was meaningless, as all pay and accolades were based on personal relationships with senior managers. Some employees were allowed to spend six months a year “working from home” with full pay, while others were expected to give up nights and weekends to attend meetings and table at events for very low pay. Morale low, unless you are white, straight, cis, and male. Then there are no problems. Leaders are a parody of white liberals, denouncing racism and gender inequality while perpetuating it through unfair hiring practices and unequal salaries. High turnover: There was over 50 percent turnover every year I worked at the organization. Lack of planning would cause the same failures year after year, as there was no accountability for outcomes. Repeating the same worst practices year after year took on a sisyphean tone. “Inclusion” and “diversity” efforts insubstantial and inconsequential. Organization’s mission and messaging focus overwhelmingly on white neighborhoods and catering to wealthy donors from Park Slope and the Upper West Side. You will be expected to work over your vacations and respond to emails at all hours. There is no work-life balance. No emphasis on projects that move the needle. No one sticks around long enough to build up institutional knowledge. Cult-like culture, with constant tests of the organization's ever-changing dogma. Very low salaries, even for the nonprofit sector. Stingy vacation policy. Even worse health insurance, which the organization only paid part of the premium for. HR priorities focused on gaslighting used-up employees into quitting, then hiring fresh meat at a lower salary.