employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

Modernizing Medicine

Engaged Employer

Breaking it instead of making it - Anonymous employee Modernizing Medicine Employee Review

2.0
Dec 31, 2014
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Passionate and smart employees. The staff here are first rate and they try to do a great job. Most are not focused on politics or career ambitions but are more focused on just doing a great job. A state of the art product. The product has some amazing technology behind it and is truly a differentiator in the medical market. It has amazing potential.

Cons

Leadership is more concerned with growing the company and selling the product than they are actually fixing it. The product is horrible and the employees know it, yet are asked to simply continue adding more and more features and enhancements instead of fixing what is broken. Even our customers simply want things fixed at this point. Leadership also lacks focus and is way too overly ambitious. They want the employees to work on a 1,000 different things when they are only capable of working on 10 in a productive way (and yes, the ratio is truly that insane). This leads to short-cuts and work-arounds that are making the product worse. Our already huge hole is continuing to get dug deeper. Finally, the company stands tall on its claim that it "hires rockstars". The problem is that when it does hire those rock stars it underutilizes and under appreciates them. Most of our rockstars are scrubbing toilets right now. The culture is childish. They hire rockstar professionals and then run the place like a daycare. They seem to think that toys, lunches, and stuffed animals around the environment will promote employee satisfaction instead of good old professionalism and focused business management.

Explore other reviews about Modernizing Medicine

1.0
May 12, 2026
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

The strongest aspect of the company is the resilience and talent of many of its individual contributors. I worked with smart, creative people who consistently found ways to keep critical functions operating despite significant operational and resource constraints. The environment offered extensive hands-on experience with complex systems, cross-functional dependencies, and high-volume operational problem solving. Employees often gained rapid professional growth simply because they were required to manage responsibilities well beyond the scope of their formal roles.

Cons

The company’s operational philosophy often seemed to confuse endurance with effectiveness. Employees were expected to absorb expanding responsibilities indefinitely, even when workloads had clearly exceeded sustainable limits. In some cases, entire operational domains were effectively owned by a single individual with little redundancy, limited support, and no realistic contingency planning. Leadership frequently discussed innovation and growth while failing to address basic organizational health issues such as staffing adequacy, process ownership, and burnout prevention. Months of excessive workload and escalating pressure resulted in predictable employee exhaustion, yet meaningful intervention from management or HR never materialized. There was also a noticeable tendency to treat systemic operational failures as isolated employee challenges instead of acknowledging broader leadership and resourcing problems. This created an environment where highly capable people spent more time compensating for organizational instability than performing strategic work.

4
See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All