employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

World Resources Institute

Engaged Employer

Waste of space - Senior Associate World Resources Institute Employee Review

1.0
Sep 13, 2017
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Free coffee, water and AC when hot. There is a lot of travelling and if you like it you're on business.

Cons

You will be low balled on salary and managed terribly. There are very few people concerned with science standards and the work produced there should not be used for anything serious in the environmental field. Even the "scientists" collaborating from outside WRI are only there for the money and will tell you the same. Many projects running outside DC are all poring down money on "gifts" to get things through so that WRI can claim was done. Senior management is disgusting and I have seen many being straight up rude, obnoxious, racist and dismissive of others in the office. STAY AWAY!

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