working at CHS - Anonymous employee Atrium Health Employee Review

1.0
12 Jan 2018
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Good PTO. Decent pay. Decent work/life balance. Job security. I enjoy the people I work with very much. Like not traveling.

Cons

Leadership/Management does not listen or does not care about the needs of the workers on the ground. All they care about is getting the work done regardless of the pain and anguish it causes. If they do listen or care, it is not recognizable. They are never around unless a crisis happens, then they are all in my business, wanting to know what me and my team are doing. They show no effort to provide a clear career path and/or help you along on that path. They keep people in place, which pigeonholes them into a role preventing them professional growth. IT leadership grovels at the feet of the CIO. The CIO dictates policy and standards that are applied globally, regardless of any special needs of certain teams. It is a one-size-fits-all mentality. Teams are denied basic technology to perform their job responsibilities as a result of this mentality.

Explore other reviews about Atrium Health

5.0
13 Feb 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Great training and culture. There is continuing education throughout the year.

Cons

I had no cons for this job. I loved working here.

2.0
21 Jun 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

I spent many years in outpatient rehabilitation and saw firsthand how much meaningful patient care can happen when clinicians are empowered. Earlier in my tenure, there were real opportunities for growth, mentorship and professional development. The team was collaborative and deeply committed to patients, and support staff worked hard under challenging circumstances. Those are strengths worth acknowledging.

Cons

As leadership changed, the culture around performance and advancement shifted. Over time I felt that institutional memory, specialty expertise and long‑term contributions were not valued consistently. Promotion practices seemed opaque, and I saw clinicians with substantially less experience and questionable communication acumen move into roles without clear explanations. Most importantly, I experienced increasing friction between high performers and leaders whose roles felt more performative than grounded in clinical or operational expertise. That tension appeared to be tolerated by the institution. Questions about decisions were discouraged, and requests for discussion went unanswered—even when they came from people with decades of service and a record of strong outcomes. After years of above‑average performance reviews, the feedback I received near the end of my tenure seemed inconsistent with my record and, in my view, hypocritical. This sudden shift in narrative felt like a mechanism to justify decisions already made rather than an honest assessment. For clinicians who invest deeply in their programs and relationships, contradictory or last‑minute feedback is demoralizing and undermines trust in the review process. Although department leaders appear to view themselves as emotionally intelligent, my experience was quite different: they delivered polished, stoic performances but did not exhibit the empathy, listening, or unbiased 360 assessment skills that clinicians need from leadership. That disconnect was another source of friction between high performers and management.

1
See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All