Pros
* General culture (for the most part) is pretty laid back and easy going. * Lots of WFH flexibility * Pay scale can be negotiated to an above market rate, but they will try to low ball you at first * Flexible work schedule. * Generally a transparent process depending on your level. There are not a lot of unnecessary meetings that occur.
Cons
* There is a lot of questionable activity going on among some workers in this office. Certain things that are discussed at lunches between the closest co-workers is quite scary and could potentially lead to legal action against the individuals and the company. * There is a strong amount nepotism going on in this office. The culture centers around a group of people who have been working together for a very long time. If you upset one of them, you upset all of them and you can forget about your ideas ever gaining traction. * The technology stack is about as old and antiquated as the business model. Don't come here if you're looking to work with anything resembling the latest trends in .NET tech. * The QA department is generally lacking in the knowledge of how to test the software. They often look to developers to help write test plans. When things break, rarely does QA get looked on for anything, it always falls on development. * Developer operations here is performed by QA, who have very limited technical knowledge. Environment management is done via manual processes. There is no concept of continuous integration or unit testing. The branching model is a complete and total mess. * Lack of a true, formal, development methodology. They'll say they are Kanban, but in reality they are very much waterfall like. Releases will happen with only a very few select people knowing about it. They are not planned and there is no date management in this regard. There is no concept of a sprint. "Scrums" are just status reports with your lead on a one on one basis. There is 0 cross team communication. * QA is very protective over what is wrong with the system. They maintain a private bug tracking repository that they control access to. Developers never see this unless they specifically request it. * There are multiple project management systems for each team. JIRA was in process of being rolled out, but each team still leveraged their own management system, only allowing the members of the respective teams access to each system. Dev had no idea what QA was working on, QA had no idea what Support was working on, etc . . . * One weekly meeting to provide management updates. * Building issues such as leaky ceilings and trains rolling by next to the windows, venting exhaust fumes into the office at least once daily. The building does have a rustic look to it, but the fact this is a corporate office environment shows how little stakeholders are willing to truly invest in the company. * There is so much more I can say here, but I think my points have been communicated.
