There are newer employer reviews for Raytheon
There are newer employer reviews for Raytheon

See Most Recent

Larger company and therefore easy to get lost if not in a top level position.

Former Employee - Anonymous Employee
Former Employee - Anonymous Employee

I worked at Raytheon

Pros

Great benefits for direct employees, even if only working twenty hours a week. Compensation and paid time-off were excellent for Tucson.

Cons

Larger company and therefore easy to get lost if not in a top level position.

0 reviews filtered by
  • Any Location
  • Any Job Title
  • Any Status
  1. Helpful (3)

    Don't look behind the curtain.

    • Work/Life Balance
    • Culture & Values
    • Career Opportunities
    • Comp & Benefits
    • Senior Management
    Former Employee - Senior Systems Engineer II in Wilmington, MA
    Former Employee - Senior Systems Engineer II in Wilmington, MA

    I worked at Raytheon full-time (More than a year)

    Doesn't Recommend
    Disapproves of CEO
    Doesn't Recommend
    Disapproves of CEO

    Pros

    Raytheon has great benefits, awesome cafeteria, extensive fitness center and beautiful buildings. The employees are generally nice if you find the right clique, otherwise, not so much. Because they are a military contractor, there is an almost overwhelming emphasis on ethical behavior, as if those of us already with ethics need this continually pounded into our brains. As with any professional engineering organization, there is a reasonable level of work hour flexibility.

    Cons

    If you have any rough edges, you will most certainly NOT fit into this company. They WILL round off any of that over time. They also use people, and when they're done with you, it's layoff time. Projects come and go, and so do vast numbers of people.
    There is no chance to move around the company because of entrenched special interests and the 'need to know'. In the defense industry, because of the classified nature of things, this is called the Silo Effect.
    When people feel threatened by any attempt to learn from them, you're completely shut out from any further knowledge acquisition. Many long-term employees are so damn busy, they have no time, nor inclination, to share their special unwritten undocumented knowledge, especially if they feel threatened in any way by your ability to understand their 'special knowledge'.
    Working in the top secret/classified environment is so chaotic and dynamic that most people in the same group have cubes no where near each other (many times on different floors!), making collaborative work virtually impossible. And they wonder why projects are perpetually and disastrously late. If you work in a secret/classified area, no cellphones, etc. at your desk and limited outside internet access.
    Project Managers are required to do actual detailed engineering in addition to their managerial tasks, thus causing poor results for both.
    Documentation is touted as being exceedingly important. However, the reality is that it's disjoint, difficult to find, of exceedingly poor quality, and almost never kept up-to-date. And don't bother using their intranet 'search' to find any corporate documentation of any value because they subscribe to the 'search everything' philosophy regardless of where it's stored, how long it's been on the servers, or its relevance to real employees. Press releases are considered just as important to the search engine as human resource policies, making the search results utterly useless.
    The company tries to get people 'involved' with things (blogs, discussion forums, etc.) that have absolutely nothing to do with the work at hand. This is a gigantic waste of time and resources. Do not fall for this because your work will suffer while you gain nothing from these interactions with other employees.
    There are special 'innovators' who present what they believe to be state-of-the-art managerial innovations that turn out to be processes and organizational structures that smaller companies have been using FOR DECADES! And they're so very proud of themselves for 'discovering' them. I had to open a few windows to let the massive bloviation out.
    This is another company that continues to drink the Six Sigma cool aid. This failed management tool has been debunked for more than two decades, and yet they're still riding that broken horse into the sunset. There are literally hundreds of Six Sigma Masters (or some such ego-driven moniker) who tout their ability to "drive innovation" throughout the company. My experience with these people was that they had their collective heads so far up their rears, that they truly thought they were seeing daylight! Astonishing how deluded they were concerning their actual ability to accomplish real work. But the company continues to push this useless and overblown management tool, tying promotions to the employees' continual movement up the Six Sigma ladder.
    Astonishingly microscopic cubicles.
    Too much noise to effectively concentrate on my work. Most people use their 'outside voice' for indoor personal conversations. This is a direct failure of managers to create an atmosphere of respect for fellow employees. These conversations should be moved to designated meeting rooms so the rest of us can concentrate on the difficult and detailed work at hand.
    There are two different groups of IT staff, normal and classified. Both of them treat their 'customers' like crap because they're outsourced! Many companies are doing this to the great detriment of their actual employees because the outsourced people have no connection to the company and it's employees whom they serve.

    Advice to Management

    Stop marketing the company to the employees. They're already there! They don't need to be continually convinced about how 'wonderful' it is to work there. There is no work-life balance. Either do the work or be shown the door. I saw that all too often.
    Give managers appropriate management tools and the time to use them. Give managers enough people to do the work so that managers don't have to back-fill tasks themselves that their underlings should have been doing all along.


  2. Raytheon not for software design professionals

    • Work/Life Balance
    • Culture & Values
    • Career Opportunities
    • Comp & Benefits
    • Senior Management
    Current Employee - Engineer
    Current Employee - Engineer

    I have been working at Raytheon full-time (More than 10 years)

    Doesn't Recommend
    Doesn't Recommend

    Pros

    A hard engineering degree, and a high school level of coding ability.

    <filler filler filler filler filler filler filler filler>

    Cons

    Raytheon is generations behind in its software design.

    <filler filler filler filler filler filler filler filler filler filler filler filler>

    Advice to Management

    With the hundreds of thousands of lines of software code that I reviewed at your company, you are incapable of writing modular software. Most engineering code that you are describing as "reusable" and "world class" is not even modular, using a professional definition. You are a software company, but deny that you are. Most of the engineering simulations that you use are filled with global variables, fractured functionality, and a lack of logical coherence. Much of the code is not professionally documented. You consider that the best programmer is a hard engineer who knows the syntax of a computer language -- that is the 1970 definition of a "data processor", or the current definition of an IT guy -- not a skilled programmer.

    Your culture assimilates the rhetoric of software design, without professional definitions of terminology. By doing this, you have destroyed any possibility for a professional discourse on technical software design. Your culture that accepts that "engineers make the best <fill in the blank> promotes a culture of technical amateurism, in which any engineer who reads a book on a subject (such as software design) can claim to be an SME in that field. Your software SMEs reflect only about 1980 software design ability. This is an amateur standard.

    You have not assimilated the last 35 years of Computer Science, and the thousands of canonical algorithms that it has described and studied. What is easily reachable, your chief engineers and scientists think is science fiction. What is computationally infeasible, you still pursue and fund in R&D. Your R&D primes put out algorithms at an alarming rate that are computationally infeasible, (because they have not assimilated undergraduate Computer Science theory), and they are not held accountable for these design failures that could be detected on paper. You cannot afford to through away 70-80% of your algorithm IRAD budget on these foreseeable failures, or give these approaches status in your culture.

    Your company culture treats software design as unskilled secretarial work, overseen by middle managers who could never pass an undergraduate course in Computer Science. You must change your culture, and your middle managers. Your middle managers deny the software problem, use empty rhetoric to cover it up, and continually hire hard engineers to do software design who have no technical training in software algorithm design (making the problem worse). Those doing software work are blamed for the design failures of the middle managers who created the software. There is no fair court of appeals. You will never attract professional and theoretical software designers, with your current culture, and its lack of accountability.

    Although you have computers on every desk, and computer labs down every hall, you are not automated and do not have the software design theory to know what can be automated, or how to do it. This makes your company horrendously unproductive compared to technical design companies who have assimilated modern software design theory, and leveraged it into automation. (Prima facia evidence for this is the late date at detecting algorithm failures after software coding, and the inability to produce multi-program simulations to quickly and accurately assess capability for new contracts.)

    You will continue to lose new contracts because of the state of your current engineering software, and the lack of professional SMEs in advanced software design. Your lack of agility (despite your rhetoric) and your inability to quickly deliver fast and accurate simulations, will be noticed. You are generations behind in software design, and the associated productivity of automation. Hiring 23 year old EE degrees to "fix" the software, will only create the appearance of a solution.

    The problem is first of all a cultural one. Hard engineering at the academy is the same as Raytheon culture. You are using business analytics to merely reflect your current cultural values (and rankings), and lay off (or not hire) the software design professionals that you desperately need. Most of the software written by engineers is at CMMI level 0: it is not even modular or functionally orthogonal. Until you are willing to assimilate professional design standards for software, and use them to professionally identify the scope and degree of your software problems, you will not have any usable to tool to address the reshaping of your culture.


There are newer employer reviews for Raytheon
There are newer employer reviews for Raytheon

See Most Recent

Work at Raytheon? Share Your Experiences

Raytheon

 
Click to Rate
or

Your response will be removed from the review – this cannot be undone.