The company grows too quickly without the operational maturity to support that growth. There was a top-heavy leadership structure with many layers of executives (VPs, SVPs, Directors), but little alignment between them. Decision-making was inconsistent, and priorities shifted frequently.
Roles were often poorly defined and under-resourced. In some cases, employees reported to multiple leaders with conflicting expectations, while lacking the authority or visibility needed to be effective. Success depended heavily on informal inclusion rather than clear ownership or documented processes.
Leadership spoke frequently about culture and values, but these were not consistently reflected in actions. Layoffs and reorganizations felt abrupt and poorly communicated, creating a sense of instability and low psychological safety. There was noticeable leadership turnover, which further contributed to uncertainty and loss of institutional knowledge.
This environment may work for those who thrive in ambiguity and political navigation, but it was challenging for employees seeking clear scope, accountability, and sustainable execution.