Pros
*Good pay *Decent benefits *The illusion of a progressive and fun company for which to work.
Cons
The culture was one of collaboration and individual growth until several years ago when Avalara was bought out by a VC firm. This VC firm made completely transparent that their their primary goal was to maximize profits and revenue. Shortly after the buyout, a round of layoffs occurred. Executive leadership swore time and time again that there would be no more layoffs, and in some ways, they kept their word. Expectation was that there would be a 10% attrition following the layoffs. Unfortunately, executive leadership had done such a good job in promising no future layoff, that only about 5% left on their own accord. Flash forward to this year and performance reviews for 2023. These reviews were handled differently than in previous years in that 10% of all employees had to be rated low performers 70%$ had to be rated "doing well", and 10% were to be rated top performers - a new directive. Now, let's follow the logic. On a team of 10 engineers, all who perform on a stellar level and are rock stars, one has to take a fall and be categorized as a low performer. This is called stacked ranking and is terribly demoralizing to both teams and individual employees. Again, following the logic, if the manager of the hypotethical team of 10 engineers submits them all as top performers, the reviews will be sent back to the manager by executive leadership with the directive that they be recategorized into the 10, 70, and 20 percent buckets. To the best of my understanding, managers were directed to re-write their performance reviews of employees recategorized as "low performers" to reflect this new categorization (this statement based on information I received within a meeting held by executive leadership). I know of one manager who had received a decent review by his manager, but the executive leadership took a look at his team's Gallup survey score and directed -his- manager to re-rate him as a low performer. The following is my own personal observation, but supported by everyone I know that got put on a PIP (at least 4 employees). Once a low-performer was assigned, he or she were put on PIPs that were difficult, if not impossible, to pass (all I know of were for a 30 day period). I know of one specifically that was told by his manager that there would be no way to satisfy the terms of the PIP in the timeframe allowed. At the end of this 30 days, if the employee had not satisfied the improvements outlined in the PIP, they were summarily terminated as low performers without severance. Also, if they were terminated by I believe April 1, 2024, they were ineligible to receive their 2023 bonus. This is what happened to me.
