Elsevier reviews

4.0

78% would recommend to a friend

(2,194 total reviews)

Kumsal Bayazit

89% approve of CEO

74% positive business outlook

Elsevier has an employee rating of 4.0 out of 5 stars, based on 2,194 company reviews on Glassdoor which indicates that most employees have a good working experience there. The Elsevier employee rating is in line with the average (within 1 standard deviation) for employers within the Media & Communication industry (3.7 stars).

Reviews by job title

2K reviews
4.0
Jun 14, 2017

Publisher

Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Great work/life balance, great colleagues to work with, positive corporate culture, diversity, continuous quest on how to better shape researchers and reader experience according to real needs of users

Cons

various departments communicate slowly among each other

avatar
Elsevier Response
8y
Thank you for your great review of our corporate culture, diversity and our continuous quest on how to better shape researchers and readers experience according to their real needs. We are pleased to hear this from one of our employees. As a global company with several business units, departments and groups, it could be challenging for all to communicate seamlessly. Departmental silos are seen as a growing pain for most organizations of all sizes. This is why we have a Global Communications Team supporting our leaders and management to equip their teams with the mind-set to break down any communication barriers.
5.0
Jun 13, 2017

Product Manager

Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Best place to work , they invest in our growth, rewarded for the right work

Cons

Too many layers . flat org structure

2.0
Jun 10, 2017

Learn. Observe. Move on.

Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

1. Colleagues. Scientific heritage brought in by the ones who have decided to switch from academia to corporate makes a lot of difference. People are very thoughtful, curious, professional, deep in their expression and courteous. That propagates further. To some extent. 2. Customers. Who would require access to world-class scientific literature databases and systems built upon that? Right, some exceptional and very demanding customers leading R&D in their domains. The bottom line is, you can learn a whole lot from your colleagues and customers!

Cons

Complacency. Over 100 years of successful operation in a monopoly position gives a sticky perception that nothing (bad) is ever going to happen, so the lack of urgency is profound. "Industrial organization era" type of business practices. Complacency creates a very fertile soil for outdated and discriminative business (aka "leadership") practices brought in and cultivated by mediocre management, also senior. The safety zone is ±inflation% growth within your product/BU upon achieving which (and it is not too difficult, given the monopolistic position) gives people a wrong incentive to install ever-more-bureaucratic processes and do everything possible just to keep status quo. As a result, the organization abounds with inefficient and bureaucratic yet very proud departmental silos that are much less efficient to work with than event contracting a party from the open market. Top-down management and decision-making mentality. It is not unusual to hear about "cascading" of decisions and KPOs. Seriously. Someone would proudly tell you that some "cascading" is required and it's your task to do that without looking at the content. Virtually no one would ever challenge that. It is impossible and considered an entirely wrong move to challenge senior management's decisions, even not openly. These managers keep hiring similar, "reliable" ones. "Strategy" is still a department. I'm not joking. Have some input for a product or technology team or want to bring in a fresh perspective? Don't bother: the "Strategy department" has everything figured out for you in a 3/5-year plan. Send your ideas to the "suggestions box". You are penalized for being innovative. Trying to be innovative and shaking the grounds of the above is a Sisyphean attempt. The more you do it, the more you feel the force of the profound status quo. And once you confront the mediocre environment, it uses its ample arsenal of corporate tools to shut you up. You have to play the game of mediocrity. Technology is isolated from Business (as an example of functional silos isolation). Business honestly thinks that Technology is something you purchase at necessary quantities as water or electricity and looks down on it. Of course: what is our competitive advantage -- technology? Nah, it is our unique strategy decks that talk about how to further exploit content monopolies. Technology, on the other hand, thinks that Business could not care less and therefore blows up budgets and downplays delivery standards. Tech management is so tired of maintaining the status quo they forget to actually work with technology. It's not uncommon to hear a talk about AI from a technology leader and experience a strong desire to cover your face because of shame and embarrassment. Tech is dominated (at least with regards to decision-making) by a bunch of US (and sometimes UK) based managers that share no company values whatsoever.

Viewing 1717 - 1719 of 2,194 Reviews

Glassdoor has 2,539 Elsevier reviews submitted anonymously by Elsevier employees. Read employee reviews and ratings on Glassdoor to decide if Elsevier is right for you.