Pros
Strong exposure to the renewable energy industry and opportunity to learn quickly. Some talented and great coworkers and a collaborative BD team environment.
Cons
The company expects Business Development employees to operate far beyond a traditional BD scope without the structure, compensation, or departmental support typically seen elsewhere in the industry.
BD staff were regularly expected to understand and speak on engineering concepts, electrical design, construction considerations, utility processes, incentive structures, proposal development, and technical system behavior, often with minimal formal training or onboarding. In many competing organizations, these responsibilities are supported by dedicated engineering, technical sales, estimating, or project development teams. Here, much of that responsibility was pushed directly onto BD.
Training was largely reactive rather than proactive. Expectations were often communicated only after mistakes occurred, creating a constant “figure it out as you go” environment. Employees who showed initiative and independently built systems, resources, and processes helped improve operations, but recognition and advancement did not always align with contribution or workload.
There also appeared to be inconsistent standards across employees regarding onboarding, accountability, and performance expectations. Some team members were expected to independently lead calls and operate autonomously within a very short timeframe, while others were given significantly more runway and support despite entering in more senior positions.
The company has ambitious growth expectations, but operational maturity, internal enablement, and role definition have not fully scaled alongside those expectations. This creates unnecessary pressure, burnout risk, and confusion around responsibilities.
There also appeared to be a tendency to frame turnover as an issue of employee mentality or “hunger” rather than examining broader concerns around structure, compensation, workload, training, and leadership consistency. This made it difficult to feel that feedback from departing employees was genuinely being heard or reflected on constructively.