Leidos is not an engineering company - Engineer Leidos Employee Review

2.0
29 Sept 2023
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

The compensation is barely competitive. The 401(k) is at Vanguard. Where a government hires the lowest bidder, Leidos is well positioned as a low-cost service provider. Leidos has a presentation series by employees on various topics; however, I have been remiss by failing to watch any of those. Leidos has a good work-to-life balance because I am not challenged by my job.

Cons

Leidos does not retain engineers. Leidos does not promote engineers. Although Leidos is a large company, it does not recruit internally. Leidos has decimated the engineering support for the contract I work on. Now, Engineering decisions are being made by Operations, or by vendors, with poor results. Leidos is loud about fake benefits. It touts subscriptions to low-quality training, such as Udemy and Skillshare. When there is a natural disaster near you, Leidos will pester you with demands to contact them--what will a feckless corporation do to help you? Leidos' internal infrastructure is generally unreliable, notably so in IT. Some mandated internal training is woke propaganda.

Explore other reviews about Leidos

5.0
15 May 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Great culture, supportive management, encouragement for self development

Cons

Some decisions move too slowly.

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