ING reviews

Key concerns: 1. Poor forward and succession planning Workforce planning often feels reactive rather than strategic. Succession planning is limited, with few clearly defined pathways for internal mobility. As a result, experienced staff can feel overlooked, and capability gaps are frequently addressed through lateral and external hiring rather than structured development. 2. Over-engineered processes and policies Governance frameworks and internal controls are heavily layered. While strong risk management is important, many processes are unnecessarily complex and create significant manual workload. This leads to duplicated effort, inefficiencies and frustration for teams trying to deliver outcomes within tight timelines. 3. Limited recognition and reward mechanisms Bonus structures appear constrained by incentive caps, which can dilute the link between performance and reward. High performers may feel their additional effort is not meaningfully differentiated from baseline expectations, which impacts motivation and retention. 4. Diversity messaging vs. lived experience The organisation actively promotes diversity and inclusion, which is positive in principle. However, when a majority demographic is dominant within certain teams or leadership layers, it can create perceptions of imbalance in promotion opportunities, work allocation and informal influence networks. Greater transparency in talent decisions and broader representation at leadership level would strengthen credibility in this space. 5. Leadership and talent development gaps Leadership capability is inconsistent. There is limited structured investment in coaching, training and upward mobility. Employees seeking progression may struggle to find sponsors or formal development pathways. 6. Limited HR and leadership support on behavioural concerns There is a perception that employee complaints regarding inappropriate behaviour are not always handled with sufficient independence or urgency. Processes can feel opaque, and outcomes are rarely visible. This contributes to a broader sentiment that those who are more vocal, politically astute or assertive tend to progress more quickly than consistently high-performing but less self-promoting individuals. Stronger accountability mechanisms and clearer behavioural standards would improve trust and culture. Overall assessment ING Sydney has strong potential and a respected brand, but systemic issues around leadership effectiveness, talent management, process design, reward structures and behavioural governance undermine employee experience. Until forward planning, merit-based progression, operational simplification and stronger people leadership are addressed, I would not recommend it as a place to build a long-term career

If you are looking for an aggressive investment bank environment, this is not it, the main dna is commercial bank.