Sugar coated exterior company with an unexpected interior
Pros
I want to be positive about RR as I do believe they have one of the best aero products and have an orderbook that is healthy for the next decade so loads of opportunities in the UK. However reading the comments on here and experiencing RR, it is hard to fit the two together. Some of the comments are statements of facts rather than true pros of the company. Example of this is "great graduate opportunities" but so does Tesco. Other comments are partially true but most are just over-inflated, such as "leadership" which is rare at RR but the word is bounded about flaboyantly. Largely driven to capture the market but also to sell its brand, RR has grown exponentially over the past decade under Sir Rose to have a multinational presence. However, this growth under Sir Rose did not grow its core framework, people, its processes and its technologies. As a result, there is a gaping chasm with huge opportunities for improvements. Example of this is the £250M investment into updating their againg IT systems and technologies, but the concern is not so much the investment but the individuals who drive this for IT. These individuals are the same people who have been in IT for the last ten years, and in my experience, have no concept of what technologies are out in the market that would apply and be a real benefit to the company. Similarly could be said about Engineering and Supply Chain, it is not the investment but the severe lack of knowledge and experience of Seniors on how to cultivate those function that would yield maximum benefits. Senior Management/Directors believe in developing Graduates for management positions for the future would solve this predicament, but they themselves are victims of this cyclic nature of this institution. I have had experience of working with previous Graduates who are now in Management/Director positions and their severe lack of understanding shines through because they are not developed in breadth and in depth for the roles and for their responsibilities. RR brand is synonymous worldwide, least so for its aero engines products, more so for its flaboyant cars which are wholly owned by BMW. For their aero engine products, I do believe the success of the brand built by its fore-fathers far outweigh the quality of a) the products and b) its people, today.
Cons
The organisation is not a well-oiled machine (no pun intended) as one would perceive. Perception externally and internally are at the opposites of the spectrum. The technologies used are at least 10+ year old. Business processes are antiquated despite RR preaching Six Sigma. RR people love to talk, have gatherings to discuss about things, but nothing tangible materialise. This is because there is no structure on who, what and when certain things need to be achieved. There is no Project Management. They have a vague idea where they want to be but have absolutely no idea how to get there. Ultimately, the most significant issue with RR is its people, who are classically institutionalised, resistance to any change for the good of the company, have no concept or understanding what is right for the company, having the right skills to get the job done and disturbing behavioural issues. It is unclear why this is allowed and even tollerated, since the company has a gargantuan task to align itself better for today and for its future.
