Anaplan reviews

The place has turned into a SaaS goat rodeo. There's clearly a deranged belief that they can cut their way to profitability, which is removing any chance of the company delivering for its customers. Offshoring engineering in a competitive space? We constantly say our customers need to be more agile, but we're now less able to respond to their needs or to competitors' moves. Innovation is a thing of the past. If you're planning to sell the IP you paid for, Thoma Bravo, you'd better do it quick. Meanwhile, the new leadership spent a major part of the first quarter coming up with new "company values," which are a complete farce. If you're going to demolish the company culture, people aren't going to be distracted from that by a corny acronym and the use of the word "empathy" every other sentence. The company was challenged with some pretty formidable goals at the start of the year, and some parts of the organization are on target to exceed those goals. But that doesn't actually matter - layoffs and cost-cutting are more important to Thoma Bravo than actual success. They purchased an amazing asset in the people at the company and threw it away.

Bias: There is clear signs of favoritism and bias in this company. Passive HR: HR is dud. Employee concerns are often ignored and not acted upon. They don’t have employ friendly policies. Inexperienced Middle Management: Infra Eng Management doesn’t have strong leadership. They are not supportive of their team’s efforts and easily take blames from Eng org and look down upon their own team. There is so much of tech debt that they don’t prioritize. And if one is courageous enough to come forward to work hard and help, they wont be seen and supported as if management want us to suffer. It’s pretty clear that they don’t understand technologies that we run. So they keep hiring more managers and more people. There is quite a bit of turnaround in leadership positions. There is always a reset when new manager comes around. Also management don’t put enough thought in putting a team together. It’s mostly location based. Only strategy they have is “hire more” and everything will magically be fixed. SF management doesn’t believe in coaching and growing people from within the org. They rather hire from outside and fire if it doesn’t work. This again causes churn with no positive outcome. 
Poor team management : Even though team's skillset is very visible and quantifiable, they don't know their engineers and don't empower them. Leadership never take enough action to up skill incompetent members.
At the same time they don’t reward and recognize performant members. No public recognition, no growth. This issue is more location(SF) specific though. 
 No structure within the team for technology ownership(and managers clearly don’t know technology). Every team member does things their own way based on their knowledge leading to more technical debt. Management treat every team member as a equal when there is always enough evidence of the incompetencies. 
This leads to conflicts and dis-satisfaction within the teams. People are often let go if they ask hard questions to management. Career growth: Pay structure is very poor. People from college are paid same as seasoned engineers at this company. Managers don't have career path for their reportees.