Pros
If you're obsessed with AI and want to be at the center of an organization actively trying to figure out what AI-first enterprise software looks like, this is genuinely interesting work. The problems are complex, the space is evolving fast, and there's real opportunity to shape things if you have the stomach for it.
If you're a seasoned UX person with a strong voice, thick skin, and you thrive in ambiguity and chaos, you might carve out something meaningful here. You need to be the kind of UX leader who can walk into any room and make a compelling, persistent case for why UX matters in the age of AI. If you can influence leadership and keep making that argument without burning out, there's real work to be done here. You'll need to fight for it every step of the way. If you're looking for an organization that understands and supports good design practice, keep looking.
Cons
Design is not a valued function here, and that's not a temporary growing pain, it's structural. Collaboration between UX, PM, and engineering has always been uneven. Design is consistently brought in late, given fewer resources, and expected to execute rather than shape direction. The push toward AI makes this worse. The official message is about embracing the future, but the undertone is adapt or die, with little acknowledgment of what experienced designers actually bring that AI can't replicate. Leadership doesn't understand what UX brings to the table, budget and headcount flow to PM and engineering, and you'll spend significant energy justifying basic design work rather than doing it. There is no mature UX culture to plug into, and no hope of one being built anytime soon.
There's also a persistent gap between what leadership says and what they do. They talk about improving, investing in quality, building the right way. In practice, the priority is always speed and short-term delivery. The optimism is real, but so is the pattern. Meaningful change here would require a fundamental organizational reset.
You're expected to be based near one of their California offices or travel frequently, which immediately cuts out a huge pool of talented people who work remotely. If location flexibility matters to you, this is not the place.
So retention has been a problem. Good people leave consistently, and the organization struggles to find and keep the right talent.
