Pros
Opportunity to gain exposure to all aspects of the BD and proposal development process—especially valuable for early-career professionals. The team is diverse and representative of the DMV region, bringing a range of perspectives and lived experiences to the table. While I disagreed with many strategic decisions, the CEO is clearly an accomplished woman who has built a team of bright, driven individuals. I sincerely admire her for staying in this business for nearly two decades and consistently growing the company’s presence in the financial space. She is the definition of #blackgirlmagic.
Cons
I worked in a proposal-focused role in the federal contracting space. While the position initially seemed like a good opportunity for growth, the day-to-day reality was chaotic, unsupported, and often dismissive of professional expertise. There is no dedicated contracts team, capture is inconsistent, and pricing input is minimal. You’re expected to be a one-person shop managing compliance, writing, coordination, and submission—often without the authority, tools, or collaboration to do it effectively. Communication was one of the biggest challenges. Requests for clarification were frequently ignored, met with vague or shifting responses, or bogged down in systems that didn’t align with actual proposal development. Strategic insights were rarely acknowledged. Tasks were marked “complete” without action or follow-up, and internal accountability was inconsistent. Templates technically existed but were misaligned with current federal requirements and overly reliant on outdated, poorly maintained content from internal libraries. There were no formal SOPs or documented processes. Expectations changed frequently depending on leadership’s mood, with little transparency or structure. External feedback highlighted recurring, systemic issues—issues leadership has consistently failed to address in any meaningful way. Rather than implementing changes, the pattern has been to deflect or downplay, reinforcing a cycle of underperformance. Leadership’s tone could be passive-aggressive or combative when approached with questions. Even accurate answers were sometimes met with shifting goalposts, creating an environment that felt more like a performance of control than a pursuit of clarity. Decisions often felt whimsical, with priorities reversing overnight. Pay was also not clearly communicated. The recruiter and job listing referenced a higher hourly rate than what was ultimately offered, and there was no formalized schedule or clear expectations around working hours. All this to say, it seems like turnover is high, and you’re expected to burn bright and burn out quickly. This company could thrive with structured processes, collaborative leadership, and a genuine commitment to improvement.