Pros
- There are some very excellent people there, though many are disgruntled so watch out for people leaving. - Some opportunity to accelerate cancer care (but it feels pretty mercenary in what is invested in vs not so I this is purely driven by the market and pharma, aka "life sciences companies"). I suspect it will be even more mercenary after the acquisition.
Cons
Overall a super-immature company with troubling growing pains for a company of ~500 - * Major issues with prioritization and under investment in capacity building. * Loads of avoidable fire-drills due to lack of planning and prioritization and resourcing and leadership. * Retention is terrible on certain teams but noone seems to care / do anything about it. I have heard that some execs think that b/c of the social mission we'll just keep attracting great people - that's hard to see. I warn anyone who asks me for a referral off. I have heard people say, "our retention is no worse than other start-ups" - maybe in aggregate, but there are clear areas that are problematic, and I have seen the 'leaders' in those areas just get promoted even when the team is bleeding people. Meanwhile junior low-performers aren't managed out. * Many really insecure people. Therefore it's hard to say 'i don't know', and hard to hear new ideas. * Many former management consultants who don't think broadly enough (consulting style of managing scope creep vs. a broad view of what a product is / should be). * Strange power dynamics with different functions: oncology / product / quant / eng. * Most meetings don't have a final decision maker, similarly for projects. This lack of leadership is problematic.