employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

World Resources Institute

Engaged Employer

A great but underpaid place to work. Passionate people doing a lot of high quality work. - Anonymous employee World Resources Institute Employee Review

4.0
Aug 19, 2011
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Interesting passionate colleagues who are extremely knowledgeable and willing to share. Office building prides itself on being green. Work-life balance is pretty good - most people have flexible hours or try to leave by a reasonable hour, though there are always workaholics.

Cons

Lower tiers (at least) are underpaid, relative to the value that they add to the work of the firm. The departments aren't really that well integrated, so often managers and higher ups are doing their own thing. Most of the work is grant-funded, so tends to stop when grants are done, and a lot of time is spent coding time billed to various projects. Can be a bit heavy on the bureaucracy at times in terms of publications, approvals, hr, etc. Advancement is usually dependent on attrition, so you may be waiting to move up the chain for a very long or very short time, and this isn't very dependent on meritocracy. They rely a lot on very cheap intern labor to fill lower tier slots, which otherwise would be full-time paid positions with benefits and a stable work flow.

Explore other reviews about World Resources Institute

5.0
May 5, 2026
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Great place to work - wonderful colleagues

Cons

Structure does not always meet individual needs

4.0
May 7, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Mission-driven work - Smart , friendly and passionate colleagues - Global impact - Collaborative culture - Strong reputation — Flexible / progressive work environment - Innovation-oriented Diverse international perspective A leadership that cares: the global leadership stepped in when U.S. funding was unexpectedly canceled, providing financial support for several programs for a few months to give teams time to secure new funding sources.

Cons

Resource constraints affecting efficiency: working with limited staffing and budgets sometimes made it challenging to execute projects efficiently Compensation compared to the private sector: salaries are noticeably lower than for private-sector roles, which is especially challenging in a city like NYC. Project direction influenced by funding priorities: I noticed that donor and grant priorities often shaped the direction of projects. Career progression tied to funding cycles: advancement opportunities often depended on program funding rather than purely on performance.

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All