In my experience, this company strongly prefers an in-office presence five days a week. I noticed inconsistencies across departments when it came to expectations and accountability — some seemed to operate under entirely different standards, which I found confusing and frustrating at times.
The promotion and raise process felt overly complex and unclear to me. There’s no set timeline for reviews or increases; instead, everything is based on performance — but the performance metrics and what qualifies as “merit” often seemed vague. Getting in front of the merit committee was a process that required building your own case and hoping leadership would advocate for you, which didn’t always happen in my case.
I often saw external candidates brought in for roles where I felt internal employees could have excelled. That was disappointing, as it seemed like opportunities for growth within the company weren’t prioritized or well-supported, at least from my perspective.
I personally found the leadership style in my department to be lacking in direction and employee support. I rarely had regular 1:1s, which made it difficult to feel aligned or supported. It often seemed like leaders were more focused on cross-functional meetings and their own visibility than on the actual needs of their teams. I didn’t feel like I had a true advocate in leadership, and at times, it felt like accountability was unevenly distributed.
I’ve also heard secondhand that one leader in my department has had a somewhat polarizing track record at previous companies, which, if true, might explain some of the team dynamics I observed. Of course, everyone’s experience is different — this is just what I encountered and how it felt to me.
If you’re someone who thrives in structured environments with clear pathways to advancement and hands-on leadership, I would not recommend working here based on my experience.
