Avantages
Since the acquisition from Camms, the company has introduced significantly improved structure, governance, and operational processes. Roles and responsibilities are now much clearer, resulting in a more organised working environment than under the previous Camms structure. The roles provide strong international exposure, with regular interaction across multiple countries and stakeholders. This helps develop communication, collaboration, and stakeholder management skills. Expectations are high and employees are challenged to deliver quality work. For those who perform well, it offers solid technical and professional development, particularly in the short term. Collaboration with Australian and US teams is generally positive, with colleagues being professional, friendly and easy to work with. Cross-regional work remains one of the stronger aspects of the organisation. There is some effort to encourage social engagement through office events, Friday gatherings, and company celebrations, though these initiatives feel more like a tick-box exercise to appear to be doing 'something' rather than a consistently committed effort to give employees an actual social event they can enjoy. A staff sports club exists for recreational activities, although here too a fee is collected from the staff, but very little related to sports events or activities are organised using these staff funds.
Inconvénients
Riskonnect can be a strong environment for early L&D, but not well suited for long-term career growth. There appears to be limited emphasis on long-term loyalty. The overall focus appears heavily commercial, with limited visible investment in developing non-Western staff or building long-term career pathways across all regions. Expectations of employee commitment are not always matched by an equivalent commitment to employee development and retention. Following the acquisition of Camms, the heart and soul of the company—particularly its strong employee-focused culture, which was once one of its greatest strengths, has simply withered and died. The culture has become increasingly driven by financial targets and penny pinching, often at the expense of employee trust and wellbeing. Layoffs and restructures occur regularly with little to no warning, creating ongoing uncertainty and anxiety, particularly in the Sri Lanka office. Many employees feel like they are one 'unmet sales target' away from redundancy, reinforcing a sense that staff are easily replaceable. While severance packages meet basic obligations, they offer limited financial security in the current Sri Lankan economy and job market. It is also worth noting for any Sri Lankan employees considering joining, the company recognition of “Best Place to Work” and the emphasis on inclusion and equal opportunity, this does not consistently reflect the lived experience across all regions. With the Colombo office being one of the more recent acquisitions over a year ago, the company has shown in the past year that career progression, leadership visibility and international transfers based on performance are significantly more available and accessible to employees in the UK and Australia than to equally capable employees in Sri Lanka. As a result, while the company benefits from a geographically diverse workforce, the principle of equal opportunity does not appear to be consistently applied across regions. The Asian offices often feel positioned primarily as cost-efficient delivery centres rather than as talent pipelines for future leadership. Opportunities, training, investment in career development and advancement have been little to none for the majority of high-performers in Sri Lanka. Compensation is another significant concern. Salaries are well below market for comparable roles, with a performance review process that appears structured to limit meaningful salary growth. Even consistently high-performing employees struggle to achieve the highest performance ratings, resulting in low annual increases that often bear little relation to the value they deliver. The process feels less like recognising performance and more like minimising salary expenditure, with employees in lower-cost regions once again disproportionately affected.
