It's all been said in the prior reviews, the detailed ones, not the planted boilerplates. And sadly it is all largely true. But to add fuel to the fire, I would add a couple more from my own experience:
The lunatic focus on utilization to the exclusion of all else. The A/E world has changed to lump sum contracts where earned value of tasks accomplished is being recognized as revenue, irrespective of hours charged. Department heads know who produces value, and revenue, not the accountants or remote executive management reviewing utilization rates. But it's the older department heads who are the first out, and the team members quite logical response is to find a way to charge to tasks regardless of capability or value added. The first lesson a cubicle dweller learns from his/her colleague across the aisle on joining AECOM.
While it is essential for a public company such as AECOM to know it's financial position at all times, the roll up of it's project accounting, by itself, is not sufficient and often misleading. The more challenging and less precise or predictable requirements for a successful project delivery are often deliberately misleading, with just the historic accounting numbers versus budgets presented. Project Executives are typically absent and show no interest in project work/deliverables, Project Managers have insufficient technical knowledge or experience to determine the real world status of their projects, essentially acting only as Project Controls people, while Department Heads are gone, too expensive, and are replaced by a roving Regional Technical Director, who may or may not have any particular expertise in the project area, and certainly insufficient time to be hands on with anything. Result is the numbers on the spreadsheet are fine, until one day they are not. Project goes over the cliff, management is surprised, and the internal blame game begins. Client is none too happy either.
Cronyism and Corruption. Tough to say but it is there. Hiring retired public sector employees on the explicit understanding they will bring in work from their old agency, promising client favored subconsultants work on other projects/pursuits in exchange for exclusive teaming arrangements, directing project overruns to be charged to overhead to maintain profitability, or limit losses, (PM justs turns the charge number off in the accounting), essentially stealing from the taxpayer, plan stamping on a major project by uninvolved PE expected to take the documents home over the weekend and seal Monday morning, deliberately misrepresenting qualifications and experience in proposals, negotiating fees in bad faith (2 sets of numbers). Safety concerns set aside in the interest of speeding up work for an upset client. And for Federal work, even knowing about some of this activity and doing nothing is considered criminal behavior.
Six months of anti depressants, finally left, the best night's sleep I have had in years. Sad to leave some great people, but you can only take so much abuse.
