Profit driven company masquerading as mission driven institution with terrible people managers - werkgeversreview Anonieme werknemer bij Nava

Nava is invested in their people and operate with a clear direction in the uncertain landscape of government contracting.

The whole contracting industry is subject to the whims of individual administrations.

The company offers a competitive salary and strong benefits package, Flexible work arrangements, including remote and hybrid options, along with occasional travel opportunities that add variety to the role. Colleagues are intelligent, thoughtful, and genuinely committed to making a difference. There is a clear, shared sense of purpose around supporting individuals who rely on government assistance programs, particularly within the public health space, which lends the work a strong mission-driven foundation.

The organization struggles with fundamental operational and leadership challenges. Direct management was inconsistent and lacked the clarity, guidance, and accountability expected at this level, making it difficult to succeed and grow in the role. More broadly, there is a noticeable absence of accountability across teams, often resulting in confusion about ownership and responsibilities. Communication practices are another significant issue. An overreliance on Slack created a highly fragmented and overstimulating work environment, where critical work was buried in constant notifications and excessive back-and-forth. This was compounded by an overabundance of company-wide huddles, many of which disrupted day-to-day productivity without delivering clear value. The organization often felt structurally undefined. Roles and responsibilities weren't always clearly communicated, leaving employees frequently unclear on who has been hired or what their function is. There were several moments where I would attempt to reach out to someone via email or Slack just to find out that their access is activated and they no longer work for the company. No announcement, nothing, just awkard moments of realizing that a coworker no longer works at the company. High turnover further destabilized team cohesion. Leadership also appears to lack strategic clarity at times, particularly when it comes to differences of opinions, and establishing clear event goals and objectives, leading to inefficiencies and last-minute pivots. Cross-team collaboration, while encouraged, often resulted in misalignment and duplicated efforts rather than streamlined outcomes. Some assigned tasks felt redundant and lacked meaningful opportunities for growth or skill development. Additionally, it was difficult to schedule time with colleagues, which slowed progress and created bottlenecks on critical tasks and projects. Onboarding and role clarity are particularly weak points—receiving a formal job description more than eight months into the role reflects a broader pattern of disorganization. Overall, the company operates in a reactive mode, often “building" the plane while flying it,” which contributes to an unsustainable and at times chaotic work environment.