Management doesn't care about people - Anonymous employee Testlio Employee Review

1.0
Mar 4, 2019
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Flexible working times, most of QA / HR / engineers are nice people to work with.

Cons

Management doesn't care about their people, if you have a different opinion than them about anything, you risk getting laid off. They are nice and friendly when they need something from you, but as soon as they have used you they drop you like a hot potato.

avatar
Testlio Response
7y
We’re really sorry to hear that your experience wasn’t entirely positive despite our best intentions. At Testlio, we always try to treat our employees with care, respect, and dignity. Like most companies, we may have to make some structural or organizational changes to support our business needs. When that happens, we try to make things as smooth and seamless as possible for any impacted team member. We’ve taken your feedback to heart and will continue to strive to do better.

Explore other reviews about Testlio

5.0
Feb 3, 2026
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

The renewed company focus allows teams to prioritize effectively and maintain alignment. The leadership team is grounded, motivated, and highly collaborative. The product strategy successfully embraces AI, positioning the company to define the future of AI testing.

Cons

The volume of organizational change over the past year was a bit high. While these pivots were clearly made to ensure both near and long-term success, so much change can lead to change fatigue. I believe that leadership maintaining the current level of transparency will be key as the org continues to stabilize under the new focus.

1.0
Jul 13, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

There is no growth and learning.

Cons

- Management lacked consistency and long-term direction. Priorities often changed without clear communication. - Processes were not well defined and varied significantly from one project to another, creating confusion and inefficiencies. - Knowledge sharing was limited, making it difficult for new team members to get up to speed quickly. - Quality of leadership and technical expertise varied across projects and teams. - Heavy dependence on contractors resulted in frequent team changes and loss of project knowledge. - Documentation was often incomplete or outdated, requiring testers to spend extra time gathering information. - Career growth opportunities and promotion paths were not clearly defined. - Feedback and performance expectations were sometimes unclear. Project assignments could end abruptly with little notice, creating uncertainty for contractors. - Communication across multiple time zones could delay decisions and issue resolution. - Test environments and access management occasionally caused unnecessary delays. - Lack of standard QA practices across projects made it difficult to establish consistent quality standards. - Limited opportunities to influence product decisions since QA teams generally worked as external contributors rather than part of the client's core team. - Resource planning was sometimes reactive rather than proactive, leading to workload fluctuations.

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All