The "startup" culture at Capital One can be a double edge sword - if something isn't working, just wait six months (or less) and it will change.
If you are a person with a "glass half empty" attitude or someone who greatly values organizational structures/processes etc. remaining static over a long period of time, this is NOT the company for you.
There have been big changes in the senior leadership team (most external hires) in my line of business during the time I have been at Capital One, a significant number (1100+) of associates hired (many as part of the drive to insource key functions). While I think the CEO and very senior management have good plans for the company (e.g., identifying key objectives each year, and making solid plans to reach them), objective identification/planning within my own line of business has historically been shaky at best, largely due to understaffing/lack of resources and multiple reorgs. I have noticed some positive movement in this area over the past 2-3 months - I do like what I'm seeing/hearing - but will reserve judgement for another few months. If this changes significantly for the better, I'll up my rating from 4 to 5 stars.
Predictably, mentoring of associates is not what it should be in my line of business given the staffing challenges.The company does pair up a "buddy" with new hires who request it. While I had a buddy, I didn't find it useful because the buddy was not in the same location or same role as me, and so was not able to answer many of the questions that I had.IT has been switching over to agile-based methods (not just for software development), while also shifting to a federated model in which IT resources are assigned to a particular line of business rather than a centralized pool of IT resources. While there are some distinct advantages to that approach (e.g., IT resources are intimately familiar with the applications of their line of business and the associated network infrastructure; fewer issues with prioritizing needs across different lines of business), it makes it difficult for the remaining "central" IT organization to keep track of everything that is going on. Time will tell how this gamble pays off.
Associates in general don't like the performance management system, but overall I think it provides a decent measure of fairness. Everyone that I've known that has received a promotion truly deserved it.. 360 feedback is strongly emphasized as part of the performance management process. Forced "cross-calibration" sessions amongst managers of all associates at the same level are performed biannually as part of the performance management process to ensure everyone uses the same standards to rate associates. This can be a little awkward if you are at the same level as your manager (yes it happens). Your manager's ability/willingness to advocate for you during these sessions is key. If the managers participating in these cross calibration sessions don't think highly of you, you're sunk...You need to be *very* aware of that in your daily interactions with other associates. One of the main criticisms of the performance management system is that it emphasizes individual performace more than team performance. Some steps have been taken to shift that, but too soon to judge the effectiveness of that change.