Black Girls CODE Reviews

Cons

Some managers don’t have goals, no performance measures, inequitable workload

Cons

Toxic work environment that stems from leadership.

Cons

the compensation structure is misaligned with the professed desire to be an employer of choice in the non-profit ed-tech space. The interim CEO is inexperienced, does not possess the depth of knowledge in non-profit management and often uses micromanagement and unwillingness to consider points of view that differ from what they believe to be true as the way to run the organization

Cons

High turn over rate Bad Management/Admin No clear direction of outcome Poorly written curriculum by non-teachers

Cons

CONS: Board of Directors: The board is responsible for creating and overseeing the BGCs strategic plan. They outsourced the 2020-2021 strategic plan to an agency to perform. This has pros/cons but it shows a lack of expertise in assessing an organization that they govern. • Provide direction to ensure alignment between the vision, mission and goals and maintain collaborative input with CEO. • Creating more transparency between the board and employees in order to create equitable and legal power dynamics is key to ensuring that the organization operates with greater clarity and confidence to fulfill its outcomes. o Share a summary of relevant board meeting minutes with all employees of BGC o Include employee feedback to assess board performance of BGC OR provide summary of results of a self-assessed board evaluation of performance with the public, business stakeholders and employees o Publish the results of BGCs annual performance on the website • Siloed Culture: Long-tenured co-workers (program directors, program managers) who consistently underperformed, ‘weaponized kindness’ as a means to scapegoat high performers, withheld work data that prevented collaborative work among departments, omitted information or misled communications during meetings and misconstrued/withheld data to sabotage other co-workers from performing well. (Example of challenging change management practices when new employees arrive and subsequently quit due to unusual employee behaviors and socialization tactics that create social distance and oppressive experiences among people of color). Hiring and Recruiting: Underperforming (and insecure co-workers) but generally ‘performative kind-hearted co-workers’, repeatedly chose to recruit or hire only other employees (friends or nepotism) that exhibited extreme ‘friendliness’ but lacked the sufficient skill sets to perform the job within a reasonable capacity based on work experience and/or the targeted skill sets desired for the role. Recommendations: Information Management Department All workplaces would benefit from an information management department to help control and disseminate workplace data between highly interdependent departments (that become siloed) that misuse or disrupt workflow and cause misinformation to circulate and ‘gray’ intended outcomes across important business metrics and benchmarks. Co-worker Behaviors: • Program Directors or Program Managers using socialization tactics to mislead work meetings by withholding or omitting key information to enable collaboration cross-functionally. • Program Directors influencing staff through socialization tactics to scape goat other employees that they did not like in order to get them to quit or to create a perception of ‘not being a team player.’ • Co-workers refusing to acknowledge and support achievements by other co-workers that they ‘assumed’ were ‘bad’ people because of personality differences. • Lack of maturity and skill sets in how to assess work performance and attitudes due to cultural differences. • “I don’t like you” so I will try to get you fired, make you look incompetent (or band with others so you don’t feel like you belong) What I learned: • People weaponize kindness to shame or get others to quit or to be scapegoated at work • All workplaces are learning how to build trust in their work environments among underperforming and high performing employees • Black workplaces are particularly rare and require careful recruitment/hiring practices to ensure an emotionally mature and high-performing work culture • Remain optimistic and build your tribes early when first entering a new workplace

Cons

Not appreciated or respected by current CEO

Cons

pick strong CEO moving forward

Cons

BGC is held in high regard externally as a safe space for Black girls to build, create, and own their craft in technology. Unfortunately, the internal experience is the complete opposite of that vision. During my time with BGC, the CEO, Kimberly Bryant, made this a space of hostility, confrontation, discomfort, and disdain. Kimberly is a saleswoman for BGC -- that's where the impact of her role begins and ends. Many large and small companies rush to align themselves with the organization based solely on the mission and what it represents. In a world where Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion is the latest and greatest buzzword -- Kimberly Bryant has finessed and thrived off being the founder of an organization created by a Black woman for young Black women. When I interviewed for my role on the team, I had long wondered why there was such a HIGH turnover of team members (at that time - most ranging from 2 months- <1 year.) My interview experience was positive, although a bit lengthy. I felt empowered to be joining a company founded and led by a Black woman and surrounded by Black and brown coworkers. Within my first month on the team, I began to put the dysfunctional puzzle pieces together. Kimberly is not a leader, Kimberly is not a mentor, Kimberly should not continue to be the leader, face, and name of BGC — full stop. Slack was her vehicle of choice to belittle, berate, and embarrass team members under the guise of being "a teachable moment" for all. Her version of mentorship and development was administering "tough love" whenever she chose to, making condescending, snide, petty, and unproductive remarks in inappropriate settings, and holding back the progress of the organization at every turn — especially if it meant someone else at the company received praise or recognition for it. There was even an occasion where she accused fellow team members of misusing company funds for personal gain. When proof was presented disproving her accusations and identifying the true culprit, rather than apologize for accusing team members of this illegal and unethical action, she 1. doubled down, stating the identified culprit could not have been the only one stealing from the company and 2. later deleted and removed the accusations, proof of true culprit, and messages from Slack. Team meetings were a place where we sat and listened — if you had questions, concerns, or alternative ideas to share, you were either shut down, told to share your thoughts with your supervisor because she didn't want to discuss it, or were dragged into a heated debate/slack battle with her about it. Kimberly was our Payroll, HR, Operations, etc. No decision was made at BGC without her say-so and final approval. Partnerships, programs, and company operational resources were often extremely delayed or put on hold because we were waiting on Kimberly to complete tasks. Team members sometimes paid out of pocket for company expenses with no guarantees on getting that money reimbursed, outsourced and enlisted help from family and friends due to lack of resources, or went above and beyond the scope of our roles to ensure workshops ran smoothly and the girls did not suffer from the lack of follow-through from our leader. Parents frequently asked when new workshop topics would be created, pointing out that we hosted the same workshops every year and wanting their children to participate and learn something new. There were no learning tracks or continued learning programs for students to build on their workshop experience and continue learning that specific content — the only options were to sign up for a different workshop with different focuses and functions. At the time - there was also no alumni development program or support to help them find internships and support through college - I'm not sure if this has changed but also worth noting that parents regularly inquired about the timeline and progress of this. Volunteers also continuously expressed concern about the content and validation of the workshop curriculum — pointing out errors and problems within the code structure and offering additional time to support the team in building out new content. These requests were shared with Kimberly but never went beyond a conversation due to her not prioritizing what the program stakeholders requested. There were no performance evaluations, team member leveling expectations, development plans, or growth trajectory guidelines. There were inconsistencies with salary and taxes and occasions where we were not paid on time - one occasion which was almost a week later than our scheduled pay date. Kimberly was on an international vacation and did not prioritize expediting this process to ensure her already underpaid team did not have to go without while she enjoyed the fruits of our hard work and exhaustive labor. There was no equity within pay across the team; promotions and salary increases were laughable or unheard of. If someone did receive an increase or promotion, it was based on favoritism and granted to team members who threatened to leave the company that she did not want to lose. Kimberly also openly showed a bias of specific team members - many receiving additional perks and benefits from her directly. I can go on, but I'll sum up by saying this - I've seen the messages in support of Kimberly following the recent decision to remove her as CEO. While I understand many students have benefited from the program under Kimberly's leadership - it is time for a change for the good of our future tech bosses.

Cons

watching the founder prioritize speaking engagements and her own self-interests over the success and possible growth of the organization. The founder is a mean girl who doesn’t empower her leaders and micromanaged everyone from program coordinators to directors. Don’t be blinded by the mission. At least 80% of former employees will tell you this was one of the worst experiences in their professional career

Cons

too much work not enough staff