employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

World Resources Institute

Engaged employer

Work work work... - Special Assistant World Resources Institute Employee Review

2.0
14 Jun 2020
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

The leadership is delightful, supportive, motivating, and talented. The staff are incredibly competent and a joy to work with. They offer a generous PTO package.

Cons

Good luck using that PTO. It can be very difficult to disconnect from the office. As a result, it’s not uncommon for staff to forfeit PTO each year for not using enough of it. Don’t get sick or have a chronic condition. Health and dental insurance plans are really weak if you live in DC. So yeah, work, work, work...night and day, evenings and weekends too. Oh! And don’t forget those holidays. But...it’s for a mission that requires our passion, and that usually makes the long days feel short. It truly is a privilege to work here.

Explore other reviews about World Resources Institute

5.0
5 May 2026
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Great place to work - wonderful colleagues

Cons

Structure does not always meet individual needs

4.0
7 May 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Mission-driven work - Smart , friendly and passionate colleagues - Global impact - Collaborative culture - Strong reputation — Flexible / progressive work environment - Innovation-oriented Diverse international perspective A leadership that cares: the global leadership stepped in when U.S. funding was unexpectedly canceled, providing financial support for several programs for a few months to give teams time to secure new funding sources.

Cons

Resource constraints affecting efficiency: working with limited staffing and budgets sometimes made it challenging to execute projects efficiently Compensation compared to the private sector: salaries are noticeably lower than for private-sector roles, which is especially challenging in a city like NYC. Project direction influenced by funding priorities: I noticed that donor and grant priorities often shaped the direction of projects. Career progression tied to funding cycles: advancement opportunities often depended on program funding rather than purely on performance.

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All