Significant decline in culture, leadership, and day-to-day experience
Pros
The brand name still carries some weight on a resume, and there are individual colleagues who are genuinely talented and trying their best within a difficult environment.
Cons
My experience here has been one of the worst of my career, and I don’t say that lightly. I’ve spoken with people who have been at this company twenty-five-plus years who tell me this is the worst they have ever seen it. On my own team, everyone from the director to the VP to the SVP is actively interviewing elsewhere, both inside financial services and outside the industry entirely. That alone should tell leadership something is deeply wrong. It started with a clear bait and switch between what was described during the hiring process and the reality of the role and environment once I joined. From there, conditions have steadily eroded. The return-to-office policy shifted from two days a week to three with little meaningful justification, and the rollout of hot desking and seating charts has been genuinely chaotic. There are not enough seats for the people being told to come in, and parking is inadequate. The basic logistics of being in the office, something the company is mandating, have not been thought through. The mismanagement of the product and technology organizations from the top down is the most frustrating piece. Strategy is inconsistent, priorities shift constantly, and leadership at multiple levels does not appear to understand the work their teams are doing. Policy rollouts are rushed and poorly communicated. At the executive level, Jane Fraser’s recent public alignment with the current administration reflects poorly on the company and feels disconnected from the workforce. The broader strategic pivot, exiting personal banking in the US to focus narrowly on credit cards, wealth, and large loans, looks like a significant long-term mistake, and the leadership team driving it does not appear equipped for the execution.