The most significant con is concerned with why someone would work at MITRE in the first place: to be gainfully employed. But here, the project task allocation is terribly mismanaged. Finding new tasks can be nearly impossible and incredibly stressful. About a year ago, management rolled out a new Task Match system that they are straining to pat themselves on the backs over. The stated purpose is to help pair up the best staff available with projects looking for workers. There is constantly a huge disparity in people looking for tasks, so it becomes an ridiculous game of musical chairs with many people fighting over only a few chairs. It doesn't take a brilliant economist to recognize that this process unfortunately devolves the "best we have to offer" into a system of "close enough to count."
To provide an example, today there are well over 100 employees looking for project work (with well over half needing <50% coverage in the very near future) and only around 25 projects advertising a need [with less that 20 needing long-term staff and the remainder offering maybe a few weeks coverage]. Unlike other organizations, there are no overhead budgets to cover staff when between projects. Determining coverage is left to the employee to figure out, but with only the extremely limited resources I described.
I've spoken to many of my current and (not surprisingly, recent) former colleagues. This whole incredibly stressful and insulting process, exacerbated by the fact that MITRE currently has over 400 jobs posted, leaves employees feeling very unappreciated, powerless, and expendable. I add insulting, because MITRE has just released new branding materials which nicely included a coffee-shop gift card, notebook, etc. And to think, they continue to scratch their heads [read: internal surveys, focus groups] over employee retention!
So you struggle to find something, anything before your time is up. You'll have to stay tuned for what happens then as I've been here many times, with a lot of lost sleep and gray hair, only to find some reprieve at the 11th hour. But WHY? Why does a company that essentially only operates a bunch of FFRDCs - fixed 5 year contracts with specific government agencies - operate this way? To add unnecessary competition and stress among employees? To have a creative way of weeding out employees for whatever reasons? Whatever the reason, it certainly loudly communicates the message that management doesn't care about their existing employees' work experience.
After all this, the reader might be inclined to believe that this author is a disgruntled, poor performing employee, who should be the target of a creative plan to weed out the dead wood. I would certainly agree, if it weren't for the fact that this author received quite a few direct performance awards and recognition, both internally and by sponsors in the last few years despite all of the struggles to keep a job.
The only other con I care to include was succinctly summed up by a former colleague of mine: Why does MITRE insist on hiring the best and brightest, but pay the average?
