Good teams, but leadership decisions are trending in the wrong direction
Pros
Teams are made up of smart, capable, and collaborative people who care about doing quality work. Many employees are supportive and willing to help one another. The work itself can be engaging, particularly for engineers and technical staff, with exposure to large-scale infrastructure, enterprise customers, and real-world operational challenges. Prior to recent RTO changes, Expedient offered meaningful flexibility around remote work, which helped attract strong talent across geographies. Individual contributors are generally trusted to manage their own time and deliverables, allowing for autonomy in day-to-day work. Expedient can be a solid place to gain experience in enterprise IT, cloud, or infrastructure roles, particularly earlier in one’s career.
Cons
Expedient’s parent company has implemented an RTO policy that effectively functions as a soft layoff for parts of the workforce. Many employees have been fully remote since before COVID, yet those living within 60 miles of an office are now required to return. In practice, this often means commuting to largely empty offices while continuing to work primarily through Zoom. This policy has already negatively impacted morale and retention. Compensation and benefits are generally below market. Perks are limited, and there is minimal investment in employee experience, such as team events. Remote employees are not provided with home-office stipends or technology support beyond standard equipment. Company culture initiatives have also been scaled back. Company-wide gatherings have been reduced to a single annual event for most employees. This has occurred despite continued profitability, which can feel discouraging to employees. The company has recently invested heavily in expanding AI-related offerings, including hiring specialized and senior staff. However, these initiatives have yet to demonstrate clear market traction, raising concerns internally about prioritization and long-term strategy. There is also limited accountability for management. One team has gone over a year without effective managerial support, and there is no formal mechanism for employees to provide feedback on managers. This results in teams operating without sufficient guidance or advocacy.
