How are the career development opportunities at The Alan Turing Institute?

Free coffee and soft drinks Good opportunities for fully funded international conference travel (role dependent)

Limited day-to-day leadership and weak line management. In my case, 1:1s were infrequent for long periods and there was little oversight, direction, or feedback on objectives, including during probation. Prolonged leadership vacancy created a real delivery and morale issue. After the team lead left, the interim arrangement also ended, and the team went extended periods without senior oversight. This left less experienced staff trying to provide direction alongside their normal workloads, and work allocation became inconsistent. At times, some people had very little meaningful work because priorities and ownership were not being actively managed. Communication and information sharing were inconsistent. Important details about deadlines, expectations, and opportunities were not shared in a timely or transparent way, which made it hard to plan and deliver work to a good standard. Raising concerns did not feel psychologically safe. When issues were raised through internal channels, the response felt more focused on discouraging open discussion than resolving the underlying problems. Career development and progression pathways were unclear, with limited visibility of how to grow or how opportunities are allocated across the team. Pay felt below market for AI roles relative to the responsibilities. The organisation felt top-heavy, with many senior roles and layers of process supporting a relatively small number of people doing hands-on research and delivery.

Great people and teams, incredible research, good office in central London, connections and opportunities to do outside research, good connections to make if considering academia, private health insurance and time off, slightly less precarious than a postdoc/RA at a university

Big redundancy effort underway, organisational change was not well managed, no possibility of promotions, huge disconnect and some animosity between researchers and business staff, no transparency on decisionmaking at a high level, people's contracts ran out without renewal frequently (against promises), no union, can't decide what it wants to be (university, think tank, business, etc)

- Work remotely - Free coffee - Free soft drinks

- Too many misogynists - No career progression - Will be sexually harassed - Will be punished for raising sexual harassment

Great people - most people are friendly and warm around you. It’s a flat structure and most seniors are very approachable. The research is quite exciting when you think of the possibilities for impact and the institute has close relations with the government being a national institute. Maximum work/life balance; one of the best you may find around. The salary is above standards for the 3rd sector - the pay is very good. Lots of learning if you’re not phased by change. There’s also the freedom to design your work however you like as long as you deliver - no one is breathing down your neck. Being an ethnic minority I’d say I am very comfortable here and feel respected for the value I bring.

Ongoing restructuring which is unsettling for many. The vision is quite blurry and there’s no crystal clear direction. Processes are a mess to be honest, but not to be unexpected for an organization that’s been only there for 10 years. Growth opportunities are very limited.

Great working atmosphere. Flexible environment.

No clear path for career progress

Beautiful office at the British Library, flexible working arrangements, private health insurance and some great, professional people.

My experience at The Alan Turing Institute was deeply disappointing and traumatising due to a pervasive culture of discrimination, racism and favoritism. Promotions were often made behind closed doors, favoring nepotism over merit, dedication or hard work. Despite the company's claims of inclusivity and a commitment to EDI, these values were only present on paper, with no real progression opportunities for those who genuinely contributed. When concerns were raised, HR and senior management consistently sided with the offenders, further perpetuating the toxic environment. This lack of transparency and fairness made it clear that advancement was not based on merit but on personal connections and favoritism.