Gensler reviews

After Gensler invited me to review open positions, I applied for a Project Manager role and completed multiple rounds of interviews under the understanding that I was being considered for that position. At no point during the interview process was I clearly informed that I was being considered for a different role. After receiving and accepting an offer, I was surprised to be asked nearly two weeks later to submit a new application for a Mid-Level Architect position (5–10 years of experience) so that onboarding could proceed. This immediately raised concerns about the company. At that point I could reject the signed offer or protect myself in writing and accept another role. Prior to my first day of employment, I documented in writing the types of responsibilities I was not interested in performing based on lessons learned from previous employers. Despite this, many of my initial assignments closely aligned with the very responsibilities I had specifically stated I would not accept. This left me questioning whether those concerns had been communicated by the office leaders to my supervisors before my employment began. What was a point of hiring me if my conditions clearly were not aligned with how this company operates? The confusion continued after I started. Internal onboarding documents distributed to employees identified my position as an Architect with 10–15 years of experience, which appears to align with the firm's Senior Architect classification rather than the Mid-Level Architect position I had been asked to apply for. Despite multiple requests for clarification, I never received a satisfactory explanation for these inconsistencies. did not start the job intending to document issues in writing. However, I received conflicting information regarding my role, responsibilities, and expectations on some projects that I joined, making written documentation necessary to maintain a clear record of communications and requests for clarification. Approximately two weeks after starting, my employment was terminated. Rather than addressing the role-related concerns I had raised, I was told that I was not a good cultural fit. In my experience, this was the most confusing hiring and onboarding process, as well as workload that I have encountered. The combination of role misalignment, inconsistent communication, heavy workload expectations, and lack of clarity regarding responsibilities created an impossible working environment. I can understand that there may have been internal miscommunication regarding my role, including the possibility that negotiated conditions were overlooked or that my title was changed after I started. I do not believe it is reasonable that three separate issues occurred in sequence, all of which ultimately benefited the company. However, given these circumstances, I do not believe termination without an opportunity to continue employment was justified. In my view, an agreement should be honored as it was originally made. I believe candidates should obtain detailed written confirmation of their role and responsibilities before accepting an offer.