Pros
For some of my time there I worked with great leadership that had a clear vision of what needed to be done in certain areas of science, and how this work would integrate with the business. There was also clarity in terms of expectations of what could be accomplished in this scientific area, and the uses to which these exercises could be put. In general, work with peers, senior direct reports, and more junior colleagues was a pleasure; partly because of the personalities involved, and partly because of general Cummins values which are emphasized at all levels of the company.
Cons
The highest levels of senior leadership exhibited poor communication on general strategy in this area, and they didn't ask the right people for advice on the decisions they were making. This would apply to both staffing decisions, and to the technical details of the work being done. It often appeared that job titles were mismatched to actual skills in an area, and that 20 years at Cummins counted for a lot more than 20 years in a technical field. While technical expertise is no guarantee of success in any organization, building larger bureaucracies will surely discourage innovation and drive in an area that should be working more as a "start-up" than as an entrenched part of the business. There was virtually no representation of the scientific knowledge and scientific experience required to do this job at any level of senior management.