Pew Research Center Reviews

Pros

- Enthusiastic, passionate, personable, and dorky coworkers who care about doing responsible, meaningful work - Early in my career, so not sure if I have good perspective, but solid benefits program. Good 401K match and an emphasis on having access to + taking leave. Progressive (more you make, more you pay) contribution system for employer-sponsored vision, dental, and health insurance. - Life insurance - Do a lot of impactful and fulfilling work where you'll have a lot to show for your time in your position. - Seems to offer good, stable employment for mid-career researchers or higher. - Tuition reimbursement if you want to take courses while working at Pew!

Cons

- If you're early in your career, you face an uphill battle for promotion to middle-tier research positions. You can be promoted from assistant to analyst easily, but analyst to associate is very hard without a grad degree--that's when hiring opens up to outside applicants. You can go to school while continuing to work at Pew (with tuition reimbursement!), but it'll be tough for sure.

Pros

-Commitment to mission and values, being a trusted source of information and non partisan -Good work life balance and benefits -Meaningful research on a variety of topics -Lot of independence/resources to do research on topics that they decide are interesting/important -Emphasis on survey research, but also different methodologies and qualitative research too -Unique place to work, a bit like being at a nonprofit, media outlet and academia all in one

Cons

-Expectations can be unclear, there are some bad managers -Few opportunities for entry level research assistants to attend conferences/professional events, publish, make significant contributions to the research -Little onboarding/training -Little focus on socializing. Only work in the office with coworkers once per week, few social events and many people are against having more events -Feels like our work is not valued -More fast paced than academia, research focuses more on the what than the why

Pros

Get to do high-quality research at a well-regarded organization. Projects are interesting. Laid-back culture. Hybrid work schedules allowed. Good benefits. Good work-life balance.

Cons

Salary could be better. Advancement opportunities for junior staff very limited. Promotions based on time in position more than merit. Management is not the best. Heavy turnover 2021-22.

Pros

people are very knowledgable in their respective fields of research

Cons

little flexibility on timing of promotions

Pros

You have the opportunity to conduct meaningful research and see your work cited by very important stakeholders in politics, research, policy, etc. Colleagues are very nice and professional. The workplace is very welcoming and affirming! Benefits packages are extremely generous. The work-life balance is second-to-none (average working hours per week are probably below 40 for most researchers, with some volatility during peak publishing periods).

Cons

Because of the org's non-profit status, there is not a lot of extra money available. Do not expect many perks. Salaries are altogether lower than analogous positions at for-profit companies. The Pew Research Center functions mostly as a loose confederation of research teams, which leads to inefficiencies. Higher-ups are trying to create a more cohesive structure, but this can be really slow. Growth opportunities are extremely limited and slow-moving. You are effectively required to leave the org and go to grad school before they will consider promoting you above a certain level (a few have done it without this, but it is rare). Your growth path is confined to a rigid structure imposed by HR, and it is difficult to get HR to recognize valuable contributions that fall outside the bounds of the preset framework.

Pros

Great work culture and team

Cons

Training and capacity building opportunities among admin staff can be improved.

Pros

Pew Research Center has a really special culture and mission. People are really friendly and supportive, everyone works hard and collaboratively, and gives credit where credit is due for big and small successes. The mission -- generating a foundation of facts that enriches the public dialogue and informs sound decision making -- is ever more important in the world, and the institution plays a really unique role. Financial picture is stable with Pew Charitable Trusts funding, and staff are given almost complete autonomy over content and product, and are never asked to "cut corners" at the cost of rigor. Everyone cares about the brand, and is proud to work here. Management did a really good job supporting staff through the COVID disruption, even doing a major salary market adjustment when their budgets were pinched, which sent a strong signal about their commitment to staff.

Cons

Sometimes the culture can almost be too tight: people are fixated on quality and doing really substantive work in ways that can let "perfect be the enemy of the good"; and there is so much collegiality that it can veer into a "culture of consensus" that sometimes impedes innovation and efficiency. All that said, these are WAAAY better than the alternative (internal division, turf-battles, corner-cutting, laziness, etc.) Another con of sorts is that it can feel hard to "get ahead" in place full of so many smart people. (It's like being in a really high-level graduate program.) Career growth is not super steep, but at the same time people really have worked their way up from the "mailroom" at times. Management has done a lot of work recently to clarify the career architecture, compensation practices, and has invested in a lot of management training and coaching with an eye toward equity and mentorship, so older reviews that are critical on this front may not reflect some of these recent changes.

Pros

Great coworkers and fun work culture

Cons

Lots of top-down decision making without consulting research areas

Pros

- High quality research with industry leaders - Collegial culture - Prestige - Good mission (but more audience priority is placed on the powerful than the general public)

Cons

- Criteria for advancement are opaque and inconsistent across teams - Advancement opportunities are rare - Salaries are low while spending on data is high - Low value placed on junior staff - Poor management at the level of research teams

Pros

There are some great people here and a friendly, collaborative culture. The focus is on producing good quality data and keeping a strong reputation. Great place to build a skillset.

Cons

Advancement is not a straight shot. And salary could be better