Incivility - Recensione dipendente - Administrative Assistant presso Atrium Health

1,0
17 set 2016
Consiglia
Gradimento del CEO
Pronostico commerciale

Vantaggi

CHS is a very clean hospital, the housekeeping staff is great. Guest Relations Dept. pride themselves on being pleasant and providing great customer service.

Svantaggi

Unfortunately, I am unable to give a negative star for the culture and mgmt. at CHS. CHS has one of the worst cultures I have experienced in my 15 yr administrative career. The healthcare industry has a history for discussing the incivility among nurses, but HR needs to look into the incivility within the administration. I had the pleasure of supporting a Director who was pleasant, consistently concise, and gave clear directives. I also supported an Administrator who exemplified classic passive-aggressive behavior with sever control issues. I reported to an Administrative Mgr. who lacked sympathy and could not empathize for my hostile work environment, as well as a resentful senior cohort that thrived on my mistakes. My last six months at CHS were pretty unbearable --completely unacceptable. I had a grievance meeting with my managers' manager, in which, he blatantly told me the writing was on the wall and that it was time I look for employment outside of CHS. I was floored by his ignorance.

Esplora altre recensioni su Atrium Health

5,0
27 mag 2026
Consiglia
Gradimento del CEO
Pronostico commerciale

Vantaggi

Good benefits, work life balance

Svantaggi

have to use PTO for holidays

1
2,0
21 giu 2026
Consiglia
Gradimento del CEO
Pronostico commerciale

Vantaggi

I spent many years in outpatient rehabilitation and saw firsthand how much meaningful patient care can happen when clinicians are empowered. Earlier in my tenure, there were real opportunities for growth, mentorship and professional development. The team was collaborative and deeply committed to patients, and support staff worked hard under challenging circumstances. Those are strengths worth acknowledging.

Svantaggi

As leadership changed, the culture around performance and advancement shifted. Over time I felt that institutional memory, specialty expertise and long‑term contributions were not valued consistently. Promotion practices seemed opaque, and I saw clinicians with substantially less experience and questionable communication acumen move into roles without clear explanations. Most importantly, I experienced increasing friction between high performers and leaders whose roles felt more performative than grounded in clinical or operational expertise. That tension appeared to be tolerated by the institution. Questions about decisions were discouraged, and requests for discussion went unanswered—even when they came from people with decades of service and a record of strong outcomes. After years of above‑average performance reviews, the feedback I received near the end of my tenure seemed inconsistent with my record and, in my view, hypocritical. This sudden shift in narrative felt like a mechanism to justify decisions already made rather than an honest assessment. For clinicians who invest deeply in their programs and relationships, contradictory or last‑minute feedback is demoralizing and undermines trust in the review process. Although department leaders appear to view themselves as emotionally intelligent, my experience was quite different: they delivered polished, stoic performances but did not exhibit the empathy, listening, or unbiased 360 assessment skills that clinicians need from leadership. That disconnect was another source of friction between high performers and management.

1
Vedi recensioni per: Utile|Valutazione|Data|Tutto