Inexperience leadership focuses on rhetoric over results - Recensione dipendente - Infrastructure Employee presso Thread

It is acceptable for a "start-up" organization to require performance beyond the job description to achieve a well-defined goal. Thread's failure is that the "goal" is constantly shifting. Everything, from top to bottom, is constantly in flux - things as basic as organizational mission statement, tactical priorities, department functions/responsibility, role functions/responsibility, etc. The CEO and leadership team are so concerned with their white guilt (and yes, they are ALL white!!) that all they focus on is messaging and rationalizing their existence. This is a mentorship organization that is so afraid of being perceived as white saviors, they won't use the word "mentor". This would be fine as much energy was spent on adjusting tactics, as is spent on looking good. CEO/executive leadership offer no vision that staff can unify around, micromanage daily work, then complain that staff isn't autonomous enough. CEO critiques every initiative, then complains nothing gets done. Leadership makes reactive tactical decisions without investigating the work required to achieve that outcome, then are disappointed by lack of immediate results. Tactics are pursued based on the context of the immediate moment, rationalization for how it connects to mission is an afterthought. Even the much-touted "family volunteer model" was created because one year there were just too many volunteers for the number of students- and now, of course, they have difficulty recruiting enough volunteers!! CEO management style is manipulative - make you feel bad for disappointing her, even though she gave no clarity on what success looks like (or when there IS clarity, she'll twist the words she used in the past to make you feel like you misunderstood). More damaging is that reported outcomes are heavily curated/misleading. The graduation rates used to pull in big foundation checks are based on early student cohorts, whose experience in Thread was extremely different than students/young people today. The 100% enrollment rate is comical --- there are so many students in that metric that Thread doesn't even know how to contact. Thread uses the same 4-5 alums in their promotional videos because most of them want nothing to do with Thread anymore. Primary volunteer source is undergrads looking for a resume booster with no social work background, who are then paired with young people with generations of systemic trauma. Inevitably, volunteers drop out due to lack of training/preparedness - reinforcing to Thread's young people that they can't count on anyone. Nice work, Thread! In summary, the organization is 100% talk, management style is abusive, and positive social impact is minimal. They pull you in with an ambiguous but appealing vision. Once you're in, shame is primary motivating tactic ("maybe you just don't care enough"/"maybe you just don't get it"). When you're exhausted/about to quit/they finally realize they need you, they'll give you $200 in gift cards (or a "mental health day", or a trip to a swimming pool, or some other pittance) along with a pep talk about how "valued" you are and how this small token of appreciation should make up for months of abuse.