careC2: Stable Geniuses w/ Mission: TBD - Anonymous employee Leidos Employee Review

1.0
15 Dec 2019
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Timesheets -- if you didn't know how to fill one out during your tenure at (insert high school fast food job here), you will learn here.

Cons

I don't normally feel the need to write reviews of my professional work experience, but I did feel this brief period did deserve some cursory documentation if only b/c it was such a bizarre outlier in the annals of corporate culture. When discussing this experience with my current colleagues, they suggests it's worth writing a b-school case study on what start-up failure really looks like. So, here's some highlights for your amusement: I applied with no idea what the parent company does in healthcare, but learned they do everything from pick up trash to serve as a hiring mechanism for federal agencies. If you don't work in the federal space, then you wouldn't know them either. The careC2 team was sold as a commercial start-up for Leidos' Health division, which is one of the smallest divisions by revenue. My interaction with the larger health division was limited, but notable for its paucity of expertise in healthcare. Early in my tenure, I sat through a surreal talk about Leidos' great achievements in the healthcare space. Apparently, Leidos has cured cancer, AIDS, and ebola. Tragic and embarrassing. The careC2 leadership is no less tragic. Upon reflection, this team wouldn't look out of place on the floor of your neighborhood CarMax. The careC2 leadership group is famous for...not existing, mentally or physically. They literally floated in the ether for most of my tenure -- figures on the org chart, but never to be seen or heard. I lamented this fact until they spoke, and then I instantly regretted what I wished for. Pressured to say something to our team about our strategy, vision, mission, etc. we witnessed several speeches where no-one could put together two sentences to completed a single thought. Once, we did receive a rambling three-page email on strategy guidance, which literally stated: Mission: TBD; and then went on to explain the differences between Candy Crush and Uber. Okay boomer? Likely the strangest word salad I've ever witnessed. The extended members of the careC2 leadership team were more benign, but no less tragic if only for their combined virtues of dim-wittiness and hubris. There was your typical office sociopath running product, with a penchant for talking like yoda. Our growth team oversaw the largest, quickest contraction in a market I've ever witnessed -- literally to zero. There were some folks who had strategy in their job titles, but it was a stretch to say that this group had a strategy beyond trolling their LinkedIn connections all day and requesting business favors. The plus side of this was that beyond the leadership structure, this team had some really good talent. But, the lack of any vision, strategy, or mission made it impossible to really exploit their talents in any meaningful way. Ultimately, the market will evaluate this group. But, in my humble opinion, this is one of those rare cases where the confluence of guaranteed funding (from a benevolent parent company), lack of start-up experience, and wishful thinking really are doing more damage than good. If this group is still around and recruiting, I would encourage you to take some time to talk with some of the leadership folks to understand their reason for being. If you're satisfied with their responses, get ready for a bizarre ride.

Explore other reviews about Leidos

5.0
7 May 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Large companies. Willingness to work with you.

Cons

Low paying. No hybrid opportunity

3.0
27 May 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Leidos provides opportunities to work on complex government programs with meaningful technical challenges. Depending on the contract and team, there can be exposure to cloud infrastructure, cybersecurity, systems engineering, networking, and mission-focused work that is difficult to find elsewhere. The company also has a large footprint, so there may be internal opportunities for people who are able to navigate the organization.

Cons

My experience was that the quality of management varied significantly by program. Communication around expectations, roles, and priorities was often inconsistent, and decisions that affected employees were not always explained clearly or handled in a transparent way. Work-life balance also depended heavily on local management. Flexibility that existed in practice could be changed quickly, and employees were sometimes left trying to reconcile changing expectations with existing workloads and personal obligations. In my view, the company would benefit from stronger oversight of program-level management decisions, especially where employee responsibilities, workplace flexibility, and performance feedback are concerned. I also found that technical decision-making was sometimes driven more by schedule pressure than by sound engineering judgment. On complex government programs, that can create unnecessary risk and frustration for employees who are trying to do things correctly.

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All