In the parts of the W3C I work in, they're awfully nice and very responsive. They communicate, consensus is a requirement for moving forward (with provisions for voting if and only if there's an impasse - I've never seen it used), and follow-ups will be made several weeks after you make an objection to verify the resolution stayed resolved. Some of the most helpful companies I've worked with recently have been, to my surprise, IBM, Adobe, PayPal, and Oracle (that is to say, their representatives are interested in consensus).
No, I'm talking specifically about Google (and Mozilla in many cases, I think due to being Google funded). I should have said them instead. Deciding to drop support features when it isn't relevant to their business model - accessibility features, the Link header, alternate stylesheets, new document DTDs, MathML, SVG, DANE, the "http://" in the address bar... Oh, but let's go all out on WebRTC, because that'll be useful to every website ever. Way more useful than DNSSEC (that's sarcasm, yes? You don't need TLSA records when you have your own Certificate Authority.). The problems seem to be caused when they don't get their way, they fork (or rewrite entirely) the relevant specification (like HTML), take all the credit, none of the responsibility (like the royalty-free patent requirement), and then all the blame lands on the WG.