Unfortunately, the culture and management within the Environmental Department often undermined the department’s potential and fostered what felt like a hostile, dysfunctional, and dismissive work environment.
Communication from leadership was inconsistent, priorities shifted frequently, and employees were routinely expected to absorb increasing workloads, expectations, and responsibilities while receiving diminishing authority and support.
Decision-making often appeared reactive rather than strategic, resulting in poor decisions, unnecessary stress, operational inefficiencies, and repeated disruption to project execution, departmental stability, and confidence in both internal and external client relationships.
Management quality varied considerably. In my experience, employee concerns were often not addressed constructively and, at times, received little to no meaningful follow-through. There was a recurring pattern of episodic micromanagement coupled with public criticism and outbursts rather than private coaching or collaborative problem-solving. While some improvement occurred over time, these patterns contributed to an unstable work environment characterized by burnout, low morale, high turnover, and employees feeling undervalued.
As a department leader, I experienced many of these challenges firsthand, but they were also consistently raised by employees across multiple years. Concerns about fear of speaking openly, perceived manipulation, uncertainty regarding job security and professional standing, and limited opportunities for career development were recurring themes brought to my attention.
Whether personally experienced or shared with me by others as their supervisor, these concerns made it increasingly difficult to build trust, retain talented staff, and foster the collaborative culture necessary for long-term success. The most difficult part of leading the Cultural Resources department was that many of the challenges affecting my team originated outside the team’s control, making it extraordinarily difficult to protect staff from broader organizational dysfunction despite every effort to do so.
Perhaps the department’s greatest weakness was the lack of long-term organizational planning. Rather than creating systems that enabled people to succeed, the department often depended on exceptional individuals to compensate for organizational shortcomings. This model proved unsustainable over time.
High-performing employees were repeatedly expected to carry disproportionate responsibility instead of being supported by resilient systems, empowered leadership, succession planning, and clear operational processes and effective communication. As experienced employees left, institutional knowledge, experience, and expertise left with them, further compounding the department’s challenges. In my opinion, this created a cycle that became increasingly difficult to break, if not impossible.
The cultural resources department had exceptional technical professionals, but their expertise was too often overshadowed by inconsistent leadership, instability, and a culture that did not consistently demonstrate the professionalism, trust, accountability, or respect its employees deserved.
