ING reviews

- the risk mindset is not embedded in particular decision making teams. Management has proven that they will continue to chase commercial outcomes despite a wealth of risk advice to do otherwise, and will do their best to flex/circumvent controls wherever they can. This is not charmingly mischievous or problem solving for the good of the bank. This is irresponsible business practice and an inability to properly assess opportunity cost. - the growth mindset is not adopted: management discourages regular rounds of two way feedback and don’t view people leadership as mentorship. The manager/employee relationship is very transactional and hierarchical, which is a surprise given the recent restructure which was supposed to flatten the organization. - interactions between stakeholders and surprisingly within the teams themselves are unsettlingly often adversarial and aggressive, leading to toxic and political work environments. - micromanagement and distrust is abundant. When the team conversations are awkward or silent, it’s not because people are busy. It’s because people are afraid of/sensitive to what can or can’t be talked about. This is worse than a big bank.

- Too much politics. - Blame game works the best if played well. Nothing new, but ING managers somehow belive words and do not prefer to get evidence about blames. - Old employees are too arrogant and sometimes childish and management does not say anything to their ridiculous logics. - One cannot just say - "I don't know" even at the cost of saying wrong things. - In the name of timeline, engineers hide their incompetencies and POs are too non-technical to even understand the problem. - Chapter leads evaluate you, but they might not even work with you to understand how are you doing in general.