Valuable but generally awful experience. - Anonymous employee InMobi Employee Review

1.0
Nov 6, 2017
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

- Compensation was competitive. - Perks (free lunch, 401k match, gym reimbursement) are pretty good (although standard for a well-funded startup in SF/Valley). - Depending on the team, a lot of latitude to shape your role and take on responsibilities if no one else is already doing something. Lots of gaps to slide into. - Some of the people are really, really great. - Opportunity to travel to India. - You'll learn a lot about how NOT to do things. Best practices by negative demonstration. - If you survive, you'll learn how to solve problems and get stuff done. An interviewer once commented, "Oh, you're from InMobi. You must be really good at putting out fires and dealing with problems." Yep.

Cons

- Awful, awful culture in the US office. Working here was a pretty eye-opening experience in how not to hire and how not to manage people. - The time zone difference between SF and HQ in Bangalore is a beast, either 12.5 or 13.5 hours depending on time of year. Unless you're willing to stay up in the middle of the night, you have a couple hours in the evening and maybe a couple in the morning (if Indian co-workers are willing to work late-night on their end). - Communication is broadly poor. Non-exec personnel rarely travel from Bangalore to SF (even less in the other direction) and educational sessions on new developments happen at 3 AM PST, opening up a ever-widening knowledge gaps. Major product changes are pushed out without consulting teams relying on the product, servers are deprecated without sufficient notice to stakeholders, etc. - Execution is weak with lack of accountability. Across the board, output is sloppy. When (not if) things go wrong, folks are often more concerned with passing the blame than fixing the problem. - Speaking of fixing problems, it doesn't happen. The culture is broadly reactive rather than proactive. Teams run into the same problems over and over again, and no one ever takes a step back to assess and address underlying issues. They attack the symptoms furiously but ignore the root cause. And they don't even attack the symptoms that well. Consistent but non-catastrophic problems hampering productivity are ignored. Catastrophic problems get duct-taped back together rather than actually fixed, complicating future releases. - US teams do not have nearly enough autonomy. Far too often something breaks and only Bangalore has either the ability or authority to fix it. Simple tasks on new products might take special back-end access that only one engineer in Bangalore has. If you need to fire it while that person's asleep... tough. - There's a bias towards throwing more man-hours at repetitive tasks and pain points, rather than implementing effective automation or improving tools. Smart people devote too much time on mundane tasks because workflow isn't streamlined, damaging morale, engagement, and retention. - Headcount is bloated, with too many incompetent middle managers. Significant personnel redundancies in some areas and not nearly enough resources in others. Far too many people have the attitude of "not my problem", and a shocking number will deny a problem even exists (apparently "cannot replicate issue" means the issue doesn't exist). You'll constantly have to hunt down the person who can solve your issue and then bombard that person with a stream of follow-up emails to get them to do their job. - On the flipside, people at times get overzealous and try to tackle issues outside their competency. Numerous times folks escalated minor problems they didn't understand, portraying minor hiccups as p0 issues, actively making those problems more difficult to manage, and making it harder to get resources for future problems. - There's an institutional resistance to change. I've spoken with folks who worked at InMobi before my time and they were staggeringly consistent in their complaints. - You end up with a perfect storm that manages to be both chaotic and bureaucratic. Avoidable fire drills are common. Minor requests turn into multi-day ordeals, because small confusion holds up progress, folks lack the initiative and/or authority to make calls, and you have small daily windows for India to get status updates. Major requests turn into insane rabbit holes with emails ever growing list of people added to email threads, constant passing of the buck, and countless hounding follow-up emails. Startup chaos is fine if teams are empowered to take initiative and attack issues as they arise; bloated corporate bureaucracy is manageable if it provides clarity, standardizes processes, and lessens stress. Fostering a chaotic environment while maintaining structural barriers to getting things done is really the worst possible outcome. - People are treated as fungible. Layoffs and the like are not handled well. The talented colleagues I liked and respected generally churned out pretty quick, let go, or had one foot out of the door. The ones who stay are stuck because of their visa situation or grossly overpaid and riding things out. - Fundamentally, the work's not that meaningful. This reflects on the broader adtech industry more than InMobi specifically-- the number of people who've told me they need to get out of adtech is staggering. But even if you're working in a BS industry, it's nice to win and feel like your employer gives a crap about you.

Explore other reviews about InMobi

5.0
Apr 5, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

They do look out for you financially and hitting goals (roughly) each quarter, well respected among leadership, like the people I work with

Cons

You definitely have to be a self starter and good at working in a place with many changes fast

1.0
Dec 12, 2025
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

- Colleagues were smart, collaborative, and supportive. They made the day-to-day challenges more manageable and and always willing to help each other succeed. - Daily lunches in the office were a nice perk and helped reduce personal expenses. - Competitive pay. Decent benefits.

Cons

- Performance management processes are frequently applied inconsistently and without clear intent to develop or support employees. Rather than fostering growth or providing actionable coaching, the process is often used as a tactic to manage people out, particularly when accommodations or personal advocacy are involved. - Leadership sometimes promotes a culture of control over collaboration. New managers can come in and assert authority without first understanding team dynamics, established workflows, or communication norms. This creates unnecessary friction, mistrust, and dysfunction. - Micromanagement and punitive practices are often disguised as professional development, but lack true coaching or mentorship. Issues like formatting or phrasing are escalated to HR-level concerns, while real systemic problems go unaddressed. Employees who speak up or ask clarifying questions are often penalized instead of supported. - Employees returning from medical leave are especially vulnerable. Instead of creating a supportive reintegration plan, some leaders choose to document routine issues as performance failures, ignoring broader context. This feels retaliatory and designed to build a paper trail rather than help employees succeed. - HR does not function as an impartial resource. Employee concerns are routinely brushed aside, and when legal risks arise (ex: related to medical disclosures), severance and extended benefits are offered as a way to avoid potential claims, not as a gesture of goodwill. - Leadership culture is rooted in fear and internal politics. Decisions often appear politically motivated, prioritizing optics over ethics or accountability. - Some managers lack proficiency in basic tools (e.g., Excel, Teams, reporting systems), but still micromanage and penalize employees for unclear or minor issues. - In-office policy is inconsistent and unfair. Employees are expected to be in the office five days a week while others, including some senior leaders, work fully remote. This undermines morale and eliminates flexibility. - Career development is stagnant. There is no mentorship culture, no clear growth path, and performance feedback is often vague or retroactive. - Systems and tools break frequently with little urgency to fix them. Internal processes are clunky, reporting is unreliable, and cross-functional collaboration is poor. Meetings often lack follow-through or leadership accountability. - Policies are not applied evenly, and there are legitimate concerns about how employee issues are handled. There is little trust in HR, and many decisions feel legally questionable or ethically troubling.

2
See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All