Lloyd's Reviews

The recent leadership response to the Glassdoor reviews was revealing, but probably not in the way intended. Leadership acknowledged that many of the themes raised in the reviews are the same themes that have appeared in engagement surveys. If that is true, then the focus should not be on the fact that employees used Glassdoor. The focus should be on why the same concerns continue to surface year after year. The message appeared more concerned with employees raising concerns publicly than with understanding why employees felt they had to. People do not write detailed anonymous reviews because everything is working well. They do it when they have lost confidence that internal channels will lead to meaningful change. Employees are regularly told that leaders have an open-door policy. The issue is not whether the doors are open. The issue is whether employees believe they can walk through them without consequences and whether anything actually changes afterwards. Many employees have already spoken up. Many have completed engagement surveys. Many have attended listening sessions. Many have raised concerns directly. Many have left. Yet the same themes keep reappearing. One of the biggest cultural issues is that there appears to be one set of rules for those with the right relationships and another for everyone else. Senior leaders openly discuss large bonuses, expensive holidays, extended absences and sabbaticals while many employees are struggling with increasing workloads, limited progression opportunities and declining morale. It creates a significant disconnect between leadership and the people doing the day-to-day work. The inconsistency becomes even more apparent when it comes to empathy and support. When senior leaders experience personal difficulties, illness or family challenges, their suffering is openly acknowledged and supported. Significant flexibility is provided. Work is redistributed. Colleagues are expected to rally around and ensure everything continues to run smoothly. However, many employees do not feel they receive the same treatment. When employees who are not part of the preferred networks face health challenges, family responsibilities or difficult personal circumstances, they often feel pressure to stay silent, downplay their situation or continue delivering at full capacity regardless of the impact on their wellbeing. Many fear that showing vulnerability will affect how they are perceived, their opportunities or their career progression. Yet some individuals appear to receive an entirely different level of understanding. flexibility and organisational support. This creates a perception that compassion is reserved for a select few while others are expected to simply endure their circumstances without complaint. The culture issue is rarely one dramatic incident. It is the accumulation of daily behaviours. Dismissive comments. Unnecessary rudeness. Microaggressions. Selective empathy. Different standards for different people. Some employees learn very quickly that it is safer to stay quiet than to challenge decisions or raise concerns. Over time, people stop speaking honestly and simply disengage. There is also a growing perception that extended leave and flexible arrangements are not applied consistently. Some individuals appear be able to take significant periods away from work while still progressing without consequence, while others feel that even taking annual leave limits progression. This favourite game is applied at all levels from L7 to L15. Some take years off for parental leave have promotions waiting for upon their return. Similarly, progression and recognition do not always appear to be linked to contribution. Many employees who quietly deliver difficult work feel invisible, while others appear to benefit disproportionately from visibility, sponsorship and relationships. Whether leadership agrees with that assessment is almost irrelevant at this point. The perception is widespread, persistent and repeatedly raised. The most frustrating aspect of the recent communication was the acknowledgement that these themes have been seen before, coupled with little indication of accountability for why they still exist. At some point, leadership has to stop treating these reviews as isolated frustrations and start recognising them as symptoms of a deeper problem. The organisation does not have a Glassdoor problem. It has a trust problem.