Pros
Anything that removes management and workplace from the equation – I enjoyed lunch times with genuinely kind colleagues and met nice people there. I like the tree in the yard! However, this isn't really something the organisation has initiated. This organisation does not own the building. The city kindly allows them to house there for free, so another organisation could easily occupy it instead. But yes, great tree! Good job, City of Strasbourg.
Cons
Lessons learnt from my ESF time: If I were a line manager and someone I was responsible for confided in me during a one-on-one, saying, “This is bullying; it’s no longer subtle,” I would not respond with, “Ohh you feel harassed,” and then stay silent, treating rules and norms as optional. Instead, I would follow up, consult HR, and review the existing policies — I would care. And if that someone trusted me and said, "I don’t feel valued the way I’m treated,” I would not point at them and dismissively say, “That’s your issue. You don’t feel valued.” If that someone explained how sobering it is to see ESF’s management blatantly ignore appeals for a safe work environment, despite the organisation managing projects against harassment—essentially tolerating bullying—I would not roll my eyes and say, “No one will believe you now.” And if someone under my responsibility as a line manager were on prolonged sick leave, even presenting stroke symptoms, instead of never having reached out during all that time, I would—at the very least—bring up the decency of sending a performative message. I am unable to confirm having received any expressed regret from line management, nor have I received any outreach during the months of my sick leave. I have come to understand—this was not merely poor line management; it was abuse. I reported to a dead-end line manager who thrives on chaos and manipulation, hiding behind charm with no particular care for integrity. On the other hand… If I managed a secretariat and a team member voiced genuine concerns about the quality—given that unchecked, disseminated outputs were riddled with typos and errors—I wouldn’t see this as a personal attack. And I wouldn’t have only one resort in my toolbox: bullying the person, developing unfounded accusations to discredit them, undermining their work, or isolating them from communication channels, only to elevate back my ego. Instead, I would invest that energy into improving the project and refrain from abusing my position. And if I didn’t know how to use Word properly—for example, “Get rid of this red line next to the text” (referring to tracked changes), or “You, insert a table into Word!” “You, convert the file to PDF!”—and then walking straight to the CEO to complain when such commands were declined - I would acknowledge that I lack essential skills. And if I didn’t know how to use Excel at all — I would admit that I cannot manage budgets or a project, and I am not equipped for this. However, I might find something suitable out there where I can add value, but managing a secretariat or people is not my strong suit. If I were a director and found out that skilled staff were forced to perform most basic tasks—such as converting a Word file to PDF—or responsibilities outside their purview like managing Excel budgets—simply because program management couldn’t—I wouldn’t justify it by saying, “There are people in this building, even with PhDs, who don’t know how to convert a Word file to PDF. That’s perfectly normal.” To this day, I remain puzzled by how one goes through life—academic or general—without acquiring such basic “water boiling” skills. How can someone work in research digitalisation without ever developing the ability to convert PDFs? And on top of that, a lack of supervisory care, tolerating such conditions until they collapse. The truth: this organisation is managed wildly unprofessional. It is sobering to know EU taxpayer money ends up there. Based on my experience—the project insights I got, ESF’s part a disservice.