Elsevier Development Editor reviews

3.6

24% would recommend to a friend

(52 total reviews)

Kumsal Bayazit

91% approve of CEO

11% positive business outlook

Development Editor employees have rated Elsevier with 3.6 out of 5 stars, based on 52 company reviews on Glassdoor. This indicates that most Development Editor professionals have a good working experience there. Elsevier is rated in line with the average (within 1 standard deviation) by Development Editor professionals compared to other employers within the Media & Communication industry (3.7 stars).

Reviews by job title

52 reviews
1.0
Apr 19, 2011
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Overall, publishing is a very dynamic field undergoing tremendous changes, and as one of the biggest players in the field, Elsevier is uniquely suited for someone wishing to learn the ropes. The London office is relatively laid back and they are fairly flexible to accommodate specific working arrangements as circumstances demand.

Cons

Where to start? Overall, there seems to be very little regard for employees. I have worked there for over six years (and am currently freelancing for them, although not for much longer), and the contempt with which employees are treated beggars belief. Departments are made redundant at a moments notice and salaries are kept at a ridiculously low level, while senior management continues to engage in charades about 'valuing our people'. Employee opinions are frequently sought to asses the lay of the land (i.e. the levels of dissatisfaction), but very little - if anything - ever comes of it and as job security has become increasingly volatile, I would venture to guess that there is a certain amount of knowledge that people surveyed in January won't be around by July. The hiring policy seems very erratic and training is almost non-existent. Rather than designating a senior member of staff or manager to the training of new employees, newcomers are usually left to their own devices or are trained by editorial assistants or whoever happens to pass by when help is needed. An incredible amount of time is wasted on providing "soft" skills (such as negotiation, time management or how to reduce stress), whereas actual training to do one's job does not happen in any way worth mentioning. Obviously, with the publishing industry in flux, it is difficult to maintain those intangible benefits that have defined publishing (such as attending author events, etc.), but while no efforts has been made to motivate staff by raising salaries appreciably, all other benefits have been reduced to a bare minimum and editorial work at Elsevier has deteriorated to a sausage factory where metrical targets have superseded any kind of concern for the finished product, the customer, or the author. With outsourcing to India taking up momentum, most tasks that made editorial fun and interesting have now been sent off-shore, while the drudge has been left for the UK staff, who conveniently double as a white-faced facade for a 'respectable' publishing business rooted in Europe/the USA.

1.0
Aug 26, 2010
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Some very competent, hard working and talented staff. If you find the right person, potential for having an amazing mentor.

Cons

Very little vacation time and work/life Distinct and hostile divide between management and staff Overly political decision-making in regards to reviews and promotions Poor pay and little to no opportunity for performance-based compensation Constant "re-orgs" make it neither impossible to get a foothold Often deal with angry and frustrated authors/reviewers due to lack of communication and delays in payment

2.0
Jun 15, 2010
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Talented people, and lots of job experience quickly. Because headcount is insufficient, you'll find yourself doing lots in various areas.

Cons

Elsevier is not good at developing talent. When I started here, there was almost no training offered to me. Management is consistently not developed as management--and the structures are such that particularly middle management cannot be effective. There is a disconnect between even mid-level management and those on the ground--there is a lack of understanding of what people are doing and an unwillingness to discipline or let go those who are not pulling their weight. Hiring is EXTREMELY political, particularly in certain groups, and criticisms are often personality-based. Elsevier is not a data-driven organization; there is little accountability for jobs done well and poorly, and lots of talk of "gut feelings" from senior management.

Viewing 49 - 51 of 52 Reviews

Glassdoor has 2,540 Elsevier reviews submitted anonymously by Elsevier employees. Read employee reviews and ratings on Glassdoor to decide if Elsevier is right for you.