Pros
When people cooperate and put aside egos, good work can be done. The local country staff in Haiti and Africa are often incredible, dedicated people, and they do a lot of great work for relatively small pay.
Cons
The organization is a shell of what it once was, and due to a lack of coordinated management is a mess. Senior leadership, both directors and managers, who were around for 7-10 years, were good at what they did and were dedicated to the causes that PIH promotes, have been either fired outright or pushed out in a passive/aggressive manner over the past 3-5 years. What is left behind are wealthy former investment firm managers and similar people who have been newly hired to serve as PIH's leadership team on development, communications, evaluation, HR and other teams. They don't really understand the work that is being done in the field, and their arrogance is off-putting to the staff in developing countries. To the Boston staff they are aloof at best and shockingly ignorant of the most basic global health knowledge at worst. There is no clear direction given to employees, and the organization operates in a very haphazard manner. As a result of constant budget cuts, threats of layoffs, overwhelming egos and infighting, the staff does not work cooperatively even though many of them are good people. The lack of structure and leadership results in confusion and a lot of animosity, and the work suffers as a result. Turnover is overwhelming and constant. During the past 3 years, several positions have turned over more than three times (that is, many people staying less than a year). It is sad, because this used to be a good place to work, even though the pay may have been low and the pace hectic, at least it stood for something. That strong sense of purpose is now overwhelmed by egotistical directors who simply do not grasp the work that needs to be done, a lack of leadership and a non-existent management structure.