Skip over menu?
  

United States Dept of Energy Golden Field Office:What's it like to work here?

Skip over sub-menu?
United States Dept of Energy Golden Field OfficeUnited States Dept of Energy Golden Field OfficeUnited States Dept of Energy Golden Field Office
This company does not
provide content for this profile
Is this Your Company?
Claim your profile now

Review averages

  • 5 employees say

    Excellent (0)
    0%
    Good (4)
    80%
    Satisfactory (1)
    20%
    Subpar (0)
    0%
    3.14
  • 0 applicants say

    Excellent (0)
    0%
    Good (0)
    0%
    Satisfactory (0)
    0%
    Subpar (0)
    0%
    0.00

Other company profiles

Reviews for United States Dept of Energy Golden Field Office

Reviews - What employees say

3.14 Employees say
0.00 Applicants say
  • 27.Jun 2017
  • Employee

Company culture

If culture is behavior, then the culture here is "inconsistent and incommunicative." Senior management does not communicate effectively, either laterally or horizontally. There is very little accountability, as management does not hold people to compliance with some requirements and does not ensure poor performance is corrected. It's discouraging to high performing personnel, and several senior managers and execs are notorious micromanagers. Many managers do not seem to trust their personnel and are highly reluctant to delegate duties. For a "scientific shop" the concept of business management seems to be alien, and they make a lot of business decisions in the absence of data.

Support from Management

Expectations of leadership are mysterious and undocumented, and you have to work to pull something concrete out of them. Goals are all over the place, are not integrated, aligned or prioritized. Managers are not consistent in documenting annual personal performance goals or in providing feedback on progress/problems. Many management decisions seem to be somewhat arbitrary (or are at least not transparent), and key business initiatives are made by multiple parties with no apparent criteria or prioritization of limited resources. Lots of conflicting and duplicative initiatives going on, and no one is communicating to the others about them. Virtually no professional development support, and conference attendance is miserly.

  • 07.Mar 2017
  • Employee

Company culture

NREL's culture is somewhat of a contradiction. They emphasize science (as they should) and profess to have good communication but organizations are highly siloed, communication from management is erratic, and there is little business management rigor.

Support from Management

Leadership sets the expectation to focus on the science/research, as it should, but doesn't seem to understand that reducing bureaucracy requires some degree of bureaucratic structure and rigor in the first place. Business processes intended to support the conduct of the research are disorganized, tribal in some cases, and largely undocumented. Employees are not generally involved in decision-making that impacts them (such as assignment/reassignment of roles and responsibilities) until after the fact, and expectations are fluid and often undocumented.

  • 19.Jan 2017
  • Employee

Company culture

Since the new laboratory director came on board a little over one year ago, the "Leadership Team" has shut the doors on their open door policy. Senior staff level subject matter experts are no longer invited to participate in discussions about strategic planning, risks, and management systems, but have to wait for feedback from their line executive on any actions. The culture has changed from one of fairly open vertical communication to one of almost none or unidirectional (informing rather than communicating). Staff morale is low in my area, executive micromanagement is up, and expectations are changing without much discussion. The shriveling of communication is impeding staff ability to be proactive, as we mostly just wait to be told what to do now.

Support from Management

Personally, our group has undergone a reorganization and merger with a larger group, and were without a manager for nearly 6 months during which time the line executive spent less than 2 hours - in 6 months time - talking to us individually about work expectations. Not entirely the exec's fault, though, as they were concurrently in three "acting" positions, juggling three executive jobs at once. That's how they manage here - in the case of a management void, they reassign laterally and overload another manager rather than bringing up high performing senior staff and giving them the opportunity to grow their capability in an "acting manager" role. It seems to reflect a profound lack of trust that experienced senior staff can handle the responsibilities.


Other visitors also viewed

Review averages

  • 5 employees say

    Excellent (0)
    0%
    Good (4)
    80%
    Satisfactory (1)
    20%
    Subpar (0)
    0%
    3.14
  • 0 applicants say

    Excellent (0)
    0%
    Good (0)
    0%
    Satisfactory (0)
    0%
    Subpar (0)
    0%
    0.00

kununu score comparisons

United States Dept of Energy Golden Field Office
3.14
5 reviews

Industry average (Public Sector/Military/Law Enforcement)
3.27
14,050 reviews

kununu average
3.15
2,140,000 reviews