Honeywell reviews

Performance Review Process is pathological. Raise pool has been as high as 3.5% and as low as 0% in the last several years with the trend downward. Stick based rather than carrot based leadership model. Leadership uses threats to remove compensation to motivate behavior. (Does not work well.) Huge focus on globalizing jobs under false economic principals. (Global work force is cheap but cannot do much of what domestic resources with same job title do.) Domestic resources that leave are not replaced. New bureaucraticc processes released weekly. Process overhead has grown substatially over last several years.

The leadership tends to swing dramatically from one critical initiative to the next, often at the expense of prior progress. For example, the current economic environment has caused a singular focus on working capital liquidity (even though the company is in excellent standing in this regard) at the expense of long-term footprint strategy - an executive blocked a move to a manufacturing center of excellence in Europe that closely matched the technical capability required for certain product in favor of a move to a Mexican COE because the temporary rise in inventory needed to make the move across the pond was 'unacceptable'. As a result we will have a mismatch of strategy and product at this location (and reduced long term savings) to "save" a short-term blip in inventory. Other downsides include the "other side of the coin" of the job security benefit: the organization has members at all levels that have outlived their ability to perform the job (i.e. the job has increased in technical requirements or the environment has changed, but they have not kept up). Also, there is little effort placed on recruiting and retaining early-career employees, such as from universities, particularly as the economy has worsened. Rather than invest in the future employees the leadership is content to wait for a crisis of retiring experts.