I wasn't going to write a Glassdoor review after I left Amida because it was just something I wanted to put behind me. Working there was a rotten experience and I've moved on, and I didn't see too much value in piling on. The other reviews on here capture the experience of working their quite effectively.
Then I saw the article written by the CEO about Glassdoor on Quillette (yes, that Quillette, the same beacon of intellectual truth that brought you "Why Women Don't Code" and unwittingly published a hoax article about the Democratic Socialists of America because it aligned with their politics), and decided that a response was in order. If you can get through this tarpit of tortured metaphors and ten cent words, you'll find that it amounts to nothing more than the author's very verbose complaint that people have been mean to him on the Internet, and that he can't do anything about it. He claims that the negative reviews he's received on Glassdoor are damaging, going as far as to claim that anonymous complaints published online "can be as devastating (and career-threatening) as any other kind of exploitative or maliciously opportunistic behavior, including those of unsavory leaders who deserve exposure." He offers no evidence to back up this claim -- no examples of businesses torpedoed by a negative Glassdoor review or careers ruined because someone falsely accused an executive of uncouth behavior. Instead, he boasts about how well his company is doing in the second paragraph, and proceeds to prattle on about cancel culture and its deleterious effects on the world at large, blaming social media (it's worth noting that Glassdoor is not a social media site) for virtually all of society's ills, from corrupt elections to character defamation to, most confusingly, global warming.
Does he have a bit of a point regarding the corrosive nature of Internet aided outrage? Sure. Does he back up his point with any referable evidence or relevant examples? Not really. He brings up the case of Erika and Nicholas Christakis, two Yale professors who were more or less pushed out of their jobs when the latter sent out an email to students questioning a university notice about culturally offensive Halloween costumes. Did the students overact in this situation? Maybe. But what the CEO fails to consider by citing this incident is that it wasn't an example of the anonymous aggrieved hiding behind a screen and a keyboard -- students literally walked up to the professors in question and told them to resign. Instead of discontented employees posting to Glassdoor, would the CEO rather they march to his office and tell him he's a terrible boss with an inflated sense of self? Based on the things i saw at Amida, I'm sure they would be happy to oblige.
Likewise, the situation at Yale wasn't just an example of a difference of opinion. It was a reaction by students to a chiding, paternalistic email that may not have even been appropriate to send in the first place. Of course, "paternalistic chiding" was the CEO's chosen tone of voice in nearly every conversation I had with him, so perhaps the kinship he feels with these people is clouding critical faculties.
This article also spends a lot of time insisting that people should put aside their feelings to have rational, fact based discussions about their work. Let me tell you something: the conference room at Amida has no doors or walls, so everyone in the office gets a front row seat to nearly every meeting that goes on. I don't know that I've ever seen someone contradict more experts and trained professionals based on their "feelings" than Amida's CEO. I've literally seen him dismiss statistics because they don't "feel" right to him. His management approach is built on the assumption that every conclusion he reaches is fact-based and impartial, and that anyone who disagrees with him is being dramatic or overly emotional.
(I've went through all of the Glassdoor reviews, by the way, to try and find the one that accuses him of voting for Trump. Best as I can tell, it doesn't exist. There's one that compares him to Donald Trump, but it never claims he voted for Donald Trump, and you'd think that a self-professed intellectual such as the CEO would be able to understand the difference. He also claims that this review was written by the same person who told him that they found their truth in the Bible. How can he claim to know this when all Glassdoor reviews are submitted anonymously? Cite your sources, professor!).
I could go on for pages about all of the other flimsy arguments and gnarled prose found within this piece, but all I'll say for now is if you're thinking about working at Amida, read this article first. Note how it offers up no actual solution to fixing the very thing it claims is broken. Note the cumbersome, faux-erudite way its written. You've just been transported into the mind of the CEO of Amida. Does he seem like someone you'd like to work for? It sure would've made me reconsider my decision...
