MITRE Reviews

Cons

Like much government work, some days can be very slow.

Cons

retirement match falling behind national labs and competitors (e.g., Booz Allen). Major strategic mistake to downgrade DoD/IC work (~60% of work program, 90% of demand) in favor of groveling for VA, IRS, HHS work (so 2010s!).
Staff uniformly hates corporate management; management thinks everyone loves them.

Cons

Senior management does not communicate plans. You cannot tell what projects are currently in the pipeline that exemplify "making the world safer" or "good growth strategy."
CEO off on vacation in the middle of a layoff. (Why would he advertise that? )

Cons

Senior leadership quietly watching the CEO deteriorate the quality and integrity of the company in fear of their jobs.

Cons

Very little value placed on late career staff who have dedicated years to mitre. It use to be a great place for experienced technical staff where the best and brightest can flourish, but the culture does not value great experienced engineers as much as really good speakers with little technical depth. The new cio and coo are creating a top heavy , elitist culture, where there are more VP’s than ever and significant staff reduction happening in the operational domain this month. The new COO is focusing on cuts with very little regards for the staff and at onetime a really great culture. Failing to offer some sort of early retirement or voluntary layoff is an example of just how little value is placed on the culture and on the staff that will be left behind after the layoffs. Other than the marketing pitch of “making a safer world”, there is little vision of where we are going as a company other than let promo our buddy’s to vp.

Finally there is little to no values shown to the experienced staff at mitre... all efforts are placed on early career staff while senior staff get minimal merit increases, very few growth opportunities and are set out to the pasture. No where is age discrimination more evident than in the operational organizations, the cio lets his directors run the show, and the directors rely solely on the deparment heads who value the early career staff since they are the only group to show any motivation. The late career staff have been Beaten down so often with lack of raises, lack of promotion, and Pure disrespect by the incompetent group or middle managers that the culture is stagnet, hostel, and simply not bearable by most.

Cons

Inexperienced officer core making changes for change sake, no long term vision, change NOW if it doesn't work we'll change again, is not a strategy.

Cons

CEO Making changes for no good reason other than his selfish ego. Corporate Operations have been told layoffs are coming and all other information has been vague. Employees are scared, morale and loyalty are low. A company that has had such a long tenure is now going to lose everyone.

Cons

The new CEO is switching up a lot of things that are making everyone antsy about the direction the company is going. I'd give it a few years to let things settle before trying to join the company.

Cons

internal communication, nepotism, headquarters-centricity,

Cons

After spending more than half my professional career at MITRE, I left for a better paying and healthy work environment elsewhere. The stress is overwhelming due to a "workforce shaping" restructuring framed as "agility' or “progress” and instead appears to be more about specifically making employees fearful, disenfranchised, and disempowered, especially those in operational roles. Just trying to survive or "roll with the punches" paralyzes some segments of the workforce.