From my perspective, the biggest potential downsides of working here are:
- High levels of independence can sometimes feel like a lack of support. IDinsight has taken positive steps to mitigate that (for example, every employee has an 'advisor' who's senior to them and a 'buddy' who's a peer, in addition to their direct supervisor; there are regular 'team health checks' and other opportunities to give upward feedback), but I know it can be tough at times for people who are in remote offices or have a supervisor who's based elsewhere. That level of independence and responsibility is exciting for some people and stressful for others, and I think it's wise to be thoughtful about which camp you might fall in before taking a job here.
- A lot depends on your project. Managers and Directors are more likely to work on multiple projects, but Associates generally work on just one project at a time and may be on a single project for their first 1-2 years with IDinsight. On the one hand, this staffing model allows Associates to develop expertise on that project and engage in a deeper way with the sector and client. The pace of most IDinsight projects also means that over the course of two years most Associates will get exposure to all project phases (client development, evaluation design, fieldwork, analysis, report writing, etc, not necessarily in that order). On the other hand, this means there's some luck involved in whether and when you get to work on a particular sector/client type/methodology. If you're at the beginning of your career and already have very specific goals (e.g. you're passionate about health and only want to work on that type of project; or you already know you're applying to econ PhDs and absolutely must work on an RCT in your first six months) then I'd recommend looking for a job with a narrower focus.