Conservice - werkgeversreview Trainer bij Conservice

-Stress -Poor communication -Company stagnation due to poor decision-making -Lack of leadership accountability. The open door policy is a waste of time because your experiences and suggestions are not validated due to your, “lack of perspective,” on the complexity of the issue; leadership is not transparent and spends more time in meetings than actually working with their teams. It almost seems like they assume you are only concerned with your own self rather than the growth and success of the company during these meetings. It shows a true lack of understanding on how to manage people and run a company. They want you to think about the job as something that helps you grow and succeed in life, but then turn around and assume you are only concerned about yourself when you bring up concerns that are systemic within the company. -Direct leadership is unqualified for the position and the lack of experience shows on a daily basis. A complex issue (which requires interdepartmental collaboration to solve) that was brought up with all levels of my leadership led to my leadership telling me they thought I was not telling them the whole story and the lack of resolution to my concern was the evidence for that—makes no sense. I was also told by my direct leader that the uncertainty of these issues would not be resolved for quite awhile and it might be better if I left the company. So the answer to a complex problem is for me to walk away—great leadership. -I do not trust upper management. Their actions do not match the goals they set for the company. Executive team changes have been acquisitions outside (of Conservice) and their lack of industry experience has shown. As a person “in the trenches” everyday, it appears that upper management is more interested in making a splash in order to “show what they can do” and increase their pay bonuses than they are about making Conservice a better place for clients and employees. The response to this criticism is that the changes were well-intended and they are doing everything they can to make it better going forward—completely disregarding the fact they did not consult with the folks who actually do the work and gave them the feedback that the changes were doomed to fail prior to implementation. To make things worse they did not have (or execute) a fail-safe point on two major projects prior to implementation and only reacted to the extremely negative feedback from clients and employees months later. No accountability was taken for months and even then they used the same, “We didn’t mean to do this, let’s look forward,” line.