Civitech reviews about "people"

""""TRUST THE REVIEWS FROM THE LAST 12 MONTHS"""" Avoid. At. All. Cost. There’s a reason why there are so many negative reviews. This company is not progressive, this company is not fair, and if you look at leadership, you won’t really find any people of color. The turnover at this company is insane. Every week, someone was being fired, leaving, or laid off. This company is a train wreck. They will get rid of anyone indiscriminately; it doesn’t matter if you’re doing good or doing bad. Anyone can be removed from their position, and Civitech will write a post about how they know change can make folks feel uneasy. They don’t care about making you feel uneasy; they just want you to put your head down and keep working. How many more VPs and executives are you going to replace this year? How many more people will churn due to terrible leadership and the mismanagement of resources and funds?

The company has the same issues as other companies in the progressive political space. Civitech, a company that presents itself as a champion of progressive values, seems to fall short when it comes to embodying those ideals in practice. Despite claiming to advocate for social justice, inclusivity, and community empowerment, their actions and business practices suggest a stark contrast to the values they purport to support. One of the primary critiques of Civitech is its apparent lack of transparency. For an organization that claims to work for progressive causes, its internal operations and decision-making processes are notably opaque. Transparency is a cornerstone of progressive values, yet Civitech has faced criticism for not being open about how decisions are made or who truly holds the power within the organization. This lack of visibility undermines the company's credibility as an advocate for democratic values and fairness. Furthermore, Civitech's approach to labor rights is questionable. While the company promotes itself as a modern and progressive workplace, reports from employees suggest that its internal culture does not reflect those ideals. Employees have raised concerns about long hours, inadequate pay, and insufficient support for work-life balance, which are in stark contrast to the progressive values of fair labor practices and respect for workers’ rights. The company also falls short in terms of diversity and inclusion, two pillars of progressive ideology. Civitech presents itself as a diverse organization, yet there are persistent issues with representation, particularly in leadership positions. While there may be a surface-level commitment to diversity, there is little evidence of meaningful change when it comes to promoting underrepresented groups into positions of power and influence. This disparity between their stated goals and actual practices calls into question Civitech's commitment to inclusivity and equal opportunity. Moreover, Civitech's interactions with the communities it claims to serve are often more transactional than transformational. Though the company presents itself as working to advance social good, its actions often prioritize profit over community empowerment. There are instances where Civitech’s initiatives seem more focused on acquiring data and expanding its market presence rather than genuinely uplifting marginalized communities. This transactional approach undermines its credibility as a progressive entity that seeks systemic change. In conclusion, Civitech’s failure to live up to its progressive promises reflects a deeper issue within organizations that claim to support social justice and equity but fail to translate these values into meaningful, sustainable action. Until Civitech demonstrates a stronger commitment to transparency, labor rights, diversity, and true community engagement, its claims to progressive values remain little more than a public relations strategy rather than a genuine commitment to positive change.

Leadership and culture fall far short of “progressive” claims Civitech markets itself as a progressive, mission-driven company, but my experience was the opposite. The values the company promotes publicly are not reflected internally, at all. People are treated terribly and layoffs are VERY FREQUENT. Your job is not safe at this company. The benefits are particularly disappointing and not progressive in any meaningful way. There’s a lack of real support for employees during major life events, and policies feel rigid and out of touch with the kind of workplace the company claims to be. Leadership was one of the most difficult aspects of working here. From my perspective, senior leadership—including the now COO and CEO—demonstrated poor judgment, lack of empathy, and weak leadership skills. Decisions often felt inconsistent and unfair, and employees were not treated with the respect you would expect. I personally witnessed situations that felt deeply troubling. In one case, an employee dealing with a serious family health crisis appeared to receive little flexibility or support, which contrasted sharply with how leadership seemed to handle their own time off. That employee worked incredibly hard for the company that cycle, from her partner's hopsital room and the company laid her off immediately following the election, that person is now the COO. When many complained, leadership suggested making her a gofund me. These people are terrible. Experiences like that made the culture feel inequitable and lacking compassion. Advancement also didn’t feel merit-based. Promotions and opportunities seemed tied more to favoritism and how agreeable you were, rather than performance or impact. That made it hard to trust the system or feel motivated. The COO was given the role without any interview, many employees proceeded to quit. Finally, there was a noticeable disconnect between how the company talks about its work and what it actually delivers. At times, messaging about impact and results felt overstated compared to reality. Overall, this is a company that talks a lot about being progressive and values-driven, but in my experience, it does not live up to those claims at all and their work is less than impressive.

Its a startup. Turnover can be high in certain positions as they try different corporate models and positions to find what works. Towards election day, the hours can be a lot. But that comes from working in politics.

The political market is very cyclical, and it's a startup besides, so it's not a risk-free job.