M&A company. Great if you are a PM, bad if you are BD, Sales, or especially Marketing - Director CGI Employee Review

3.0
Sep 6, 2018
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Very PM-oriented company. Great methodologies and implementation and PM structure. Can't get much better. Also they are very M&A oriented. Organic growth just doesn't come easily to these guys. This is due to the regionalized and decentralized organizational structure. What they do is mostly at regional or local levels, not national or global. Decent employee stock purchase plan and 401k plan.

Cons

Lousy when it comes to rewarding employees. Raises are few (if ever). Bonuses haven't been doled out for going on 3 years. If you are in sales or BD, they have one of the worst compensation structures out there. Its almost like they don't want to sell anything - just acquire other companies. Commissions are rarely paid out and even then only reluctantly. Don't believe the website when it comes to CGI's offerings when it boils down to a local level. Most offerings on the website are only available in select areas around the world and not locally. Also the health plan stinks.

Explore other reviews about CGI

5.0
Jun 18, 2026
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Work life balance, growth, quality

Cons

Less pay compared to market

1.0
Jun 16, 2026
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

no specific positives to highlight from my perspective

Cons

I worked at CGI in both India and the USA and observed similar workplace culture concerns across both locations. The only real difference was HR—India HR felt more supportive, while my experience with USA HR was disappointing. My employment ended shortly after maternity leave due to an alleged “lack of projects,” which I experienced as a layoff. I also observed what appeared to be misuse of position by some leaders, including blurred professional boundaries, preferential treatment, and expectations that went beyond normal workplace roles—at times resembling personal-assistant-style demands rather than professional conduct. Surprisingly, I also noticed inconsistent “policies” applied differently to different individuals. In some cases, it felt like the rules changed depending on who you were. When leadership became aware that someone was related to another employee in the organization, it sometimes felt like that person was singled out or targeted rather than treated objectively. Overall, these practices—whether through inconsistent treatment, perceived power misuse, or favoritism—undermine trust, damage workplace culture, and raise serious concerns about fairness and professionalism.

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All