Ihr Unternehmen?
Basierend auf Daten aus 5 Bewertungen schätzen Mitarbeiter:innen bei Walder Wyss die Unternehmenskultur als traditionell ein, während der Branchendurchschnitt zwischen traditionell und modern liegt. Die Zufriedenheit mit der Unternehmenskultur beträgt 2,4 Punkte auf einer Skala von 1 bis 5 basierend auf 19 Bewertungen.
Nutze deine Stimme und verrate uns, wie die Unternehmenskultur deines Arbeitgebers wirklich aussieht.
Die Unternehmenskultur kann in vier wichtige Dimensionen eingeteilt werden: Work-Life-Balance, Zusammenarbeit, Führung und strategische Ausrichtung. Jede dieser Dimensionen hat ihren eigenen Maßstab zwischen traditionell und modern.
5 User:innen haben eine Kulturbewertung abgegeben. Diese Faktoren wurden am häufigsten ausgewählt, um die Unternehmenskultur zu beschreiben.
FührungTraditionell
FührungTraditionell
FührungModern
Strategische RichtungModern
Umgang miteinanderModern
Hast du gewusst, dass es 6 Fragen zur Unternehmenskultur gibt, wenn du einen Arbeitgeber auf kununu bewertest? Hier sind die neuesten dieser Kommentare.
Key information was often withheld or delayed, and feedback was inconsistent or absent. Critical reports were sometimes ignored, leading to unresolved errors that were not prioritised in time. This caused avoidable outages and extra work, negatively impacting productivity company wide.
Limited collaboration and trust. Instances of workplace bullying were tolerated, and many chose to align with management rather than address issues directly. Clear favouritism which led to a hostile atmosphere.
Despite repeatedly requesting time off over many months, I was denied vacation until after 10 months - while being a single mother to a 4 and a 6 year old. Strangely, I was often told I “had no idea” about my job, yet was still considered too essential to take leave. Service hours were extended without pay adjustment, and I was told to work overtime to justify hiring another engineer.
Tense atmosphere during management presence, with little open communication to the full team. Decisions were often made without discussion and sometimes lacked clear reasoning. Despite general flexibility in organising work, there was micromanagement on minor issues, public criticism, minimal appreciation, and little constructive conflict resolution. It was mentioned to me that a female colleague had left after three months due to similar behaviour. I was also told directly that these issues “would not exist” if a man had been hired. In one conversation, I asked whether the department was being run like a “sheltered workshop,” and the response was simply “yes,” which reflected the lack of business-focused decision-making. On several occasions, raising legitimate concerns made me feel as though I was the problem. This included informing management about operational issues and even security-relevant matters — such as a colleague privately selling company hardware — which should have been documented but were not. Such responses discouraged transparency and undermined trust within the team.
I enjoyed my core responsibilities and would not have stayed for two years otherwise. The role offered significant autonomy, though this also meant that contributions were often not visible or acknowledged.
Marked by disrespect, exclusion, and lack of accountability. Achievements were ignored, minor issues magnified, and favouritism prevailed. Speaking up led to isolation and eventual dismissal.