Grant Street Group reviews

3.7

66% would recommend to a friend

(89 total reviews)

Myles Harrington and Dan Veres

89% approve of CEO

69% positive business outlook

Grant Street Group has an employee rating of 3.7 out of 5 stars, based on 89 company reviews on Glassdoor which indicates that most employees have a good working experience there. The Grant Street Group employee rating is in line with the average (within 1 standard deviation) for employers within the Information Technology industry (3.9 stars).

Reviews by job title

89 reviews
1.0
Aug 9, 2024

Fake Culture. Horrendous and heartless management

Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Lower level people you work with are kind and helpful

Cons

Management is the most elitist and incompetent group you will ever come across. They spend their interviews gushing about the amazing culture and how smart and humble the entire staff is, but this isn't at all true. The lower level employees are capable and down to earth, but the upper management is completely disconnected and condescending. They do not value the feedback of their employees, and I have known of multiple analysts who have been fired with no warning or attempt at a PIP, despite protests from their mentor/team lead. GSG says they don't do titles like "senior" or "vice president" as part of the culture, but this is the most toxic hierarchy I have ever witnessed. If you work here, be prepared to be in constant fear of having to interact with the snobs in upper management, as they make swift decisions based on little to no evidence. They also preach about how if the role you are in isn't a fit for you they will work to find your fit. This could not be further from the truth. You'll either be shuffled around to random teams that are short staffed, or terminated. Don't fall for all the culty talk about the culture. None of it is genuine.

avatar
Grant Street Group Response
1y
Response from our President: If you really are a current employee, I invite you to come forward and meet with anyone on the executive team you would feel comfortable talking to about your concerns. Both of the co-founders are also willing to meet with you. We are open to constructive feedback. No reprisals.
3.0
Aug 7, 2024

Great place to start in tech, maybe not the place to stay

Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

The benefits are good. You start with 3.5 weeks of PTO/year; and if you make it to five years, you will have almost 5 weeks of PTO a year. Insurance is also good. You will work with genuinely kind and helpful folks who will not mind dropping what they’re doing to help you. I’ve made some great friends here beyond work, and my network of former coworkers has also been extremely helpful. Regarding the Business Analyst (BA) role, if you are new to the tech industry, GSG is willing to hire you. This could be a great option if you’re a young professional just starting their career and don’t have a CS degree or are someone wanting to pivot into the business side of tech. As a BA, you also will gain a wide exposure to different spheres within the tech industry. In my experience, I was able to wear a lot of hats (coding, QA, client and stakeholder management, customer support, project management, DevOps, and product management just to name a few) and figure out what I really enjoyed. I honestly didn’t realize how much I learned until I left. Professionally, this is what I’m most grateful for during my time there, and I certainly don’t take it for granted. There isn’t a strong culture of demanding long work hours, and GSG was a remote company even before the pandemic. For those looking for a remote job with decent work/life balance, this could be a fit. You get the chance to take a fancy, annual trip to a random city for a company-wide meeting, which is a wonderful opportunity to see your coworkers and have fun in a new place on the company’s dime. The product I worked on also had a separate in-person event in their headquarters in Pittsburgh, which you would travel to similarly if you’re not local and was also reimbursed.

Cons

At the end of the day, you are making it less frustrating for constituents to pay their taxes and for other things to their government. It’s not an extremely exciting problem to solve. The interview process is brutal for an entry-level role. A logic test, a writing sample, an HR interview, a panel interview, and then a super day of interviews with case studies, a presentation, and potentially meeting the co-founders. I made it through interviews for more senior positions and higher pay that were significantly less intense. Pro tip: if you’re told the co-founders were busy at the end of your final interview day and couldn’t meet with you, you might not have gotten the job. The co-founders won’t meet with any candidates that have been already rejected by their performance in previous interviews. Once you’re hired, you are still potentially on the chopping block. I’ve seen plenty of folks get fired during onboarding, which is as much of a trial process as the initial interviews. In my experience, your great experiences will be positive, but your negative experiences can be intense. I’ve spoken with folks who left voluntarily and folks who were let go, and I wasn’t alone. There is a tremendous amount to learn as a BA, and it will take you time to have a full handle on things. I remember as a newbie asking a senior person when they felt like they finally understood things, and they said three years. That was my experience, too. There is little DE&I here. The owners are also socially conservative, which does influence the company culture. I imagine this lack of political stance makes GSG more appealing to government clients. If you want to work for a company that takes a stronger stance on social issues, this isn’t the place for you. The company only hires for a handful of roles, none of them management or senior. If you are farther along in your tech career, I would not apply here. In my experience, the company is growing faster than its culture can keep up. The product I worked on is primarily staffed by folks who have less than two years of experience, many of whom on the business side have little technical experience prior to GSG. GSG is extremely opaque when it comes to pay, and there is a lot of pay asymmetry. This asymmetry matters more as you become more senior. GSG discourages talking about pay with your coworkers (they cannot ban that discussion, as that would be illegal). Personally, I found my conversations about pay with my coworkers to be extremely useful and helpful in determining whether I was making what I was worth and should be advocating for myself. Office politics exist here, despite what GSG may claim when talking about its culture, and they are crucial to understand if you hope to rise the ranks or do not want to be pigeonholed into a role you do not want to do. There are a handful of people that, if you rub them the wrong way or don’t give them the right impression, can put a cap on your career at GSG or cut your time at GSG short. There is a bit of a “drink the Kool-Aid” vibe here that GSG is irreproachable in its ways and culture, which I think distracts from addressing the problems that exist within the company. Middle management is a significant problem, as noted in other reviews. In my 5+ years in the company, I never participated in any upwards feedback as a part of the performance review process. I’ve had managers here that ranged from unhelpful to actively hurtful. I also had a few managers early in my career that were brilliant and cared about me as a person, but they were the exception rather than the rule. There are no defined career path or paths for advancement here on the business side. This worked when GSG was a smaller company that could handle folks making their own career paths, but those days are gone with a much larger workforce. In my opinion, to scale they need to define career paths if want to encourage not turning folks over. Including myself, I have seen lots of people leave because their careers were not moving and weren’t receiving any meaningful professional development. Also, including myself, they often leave for a less demanding job that pays significantly more. Job titles are primarily flat here. I know folks who have been a BA for over ten years. In principle, I don’t think titles are everything; but it becomes a problem when you want to take the next step in your career and need to communicate what you actually have done. GSG doesn’t use BA’s like most software companies, either, so using the GSG title may not help you communicate the nature of your work. Speaking of BA’s, the BA role here is a mishmash of so many jobs that would have separate titles at other companies. While this is great for gaining experience, it’s frustrating when you do find what you want to focus on and still have three other jobs. Or when you feel underpaid for your work once you gain enough experience. There is a general expectation that you figure out your work on your own without a lot of handholding. This can be challenging if you’re moving into a new role or team where you might be working on very different things and need to build new skills. Doing things on your own for professional development, in my experience, wasn’t acknowledged in terms of compensation, and the company does not offer any PD benefits like a learning stipend or tuition reimbursement. The more you learn about the current tech industry, the more obvious it becomes that GSG does things in a different, but not necessarily better, way. Product teams, for example, do not have design or QA teams – those things are done by BA’s and engineers themselves. This can make it more challenging to transition to a new role where you would be working with these different roles and need to show you have experience doing it.

avatar
Grant Street Group Response
1y
Response from our President: Thanks for acknowledging your appreciation of your former colleagues, the benefits of your BA experience at Grant Street, and our commitment to work-life balance. Regarding your comments on DEI, I'm not sure where you find us deficient, but there is one important statistic that belies your assertion: 30% of our new hires are non-white, which is higher than the U.S. labor force rate. On the topic of the company’s social values, as one of the owners, I can assure you that I hold views on social issues that defy the "socially conservative" label you have assigned to me. This is particularly true of my convictions regarding the right relationship between labor and capital, between employers and employees. These ideas are deeply embedded in the company culture that you disparage and they are a vital source of employee satisfaction. Concerning your point about us “only hir[ing] for a handful of roles,” it’s true that most of our senior managers grew into their current positions, which has earned them the respect of their colleagues. However, most of our new hires in software development, IT, project management and business analyst roles have relevant prior work experience. As for your opinion that the company’s growth may outpace its culture, the evidence you cite (i.e. the relative inexperience of your team) bears no relation to the company culture, which, according to other commentaries in this space, is thriving. To be credible, your remarks about "pay asymmetry" would require access to a great deal of confidential information that you didn't have. We don't disclose individual salaries out of respect for personal privacy; however, we do disclose pay ranges in compliance with state regulations. Any disparities in compensation are attributable to differences in experience, performance and varying degrees of job responsibilities. To have attempted to make a meaningful assessment of your "worth" by way of such comparisons would have been fruitless, likely misleading, without access to the confidential employee evaluations of your sources. On the subject of office politics, it should come as no surprise that there will always be some degree of office politics among mortals, but we try to neutralize it with practices like annual written performance reviews (often more frequent), skip-level one-on-one meetings (with the boss's boss), anonymous peer reviews, executive level comp reviews of all employees, anonymous employee feedback channels and a Co-CEO open door policy. Despite these measures, some just will not accept critical feedback, attributing it to office politics. We get some reassurance from not infrequent comments, including in this forum, that there is less politics at Grant Street than any other place the commenter has worked. Nevertheless, we will never slacken in our continuing efforts to minimize it. Lastly, concerning career paths and job titles, we believe it couldn't be more clearly defined or more consistently applied: outstanding performance results in rapid advancement. This explains why we have so many senior managers who have been with the company for 10-20 years and why our turnover rate remains at half the tech industry average. Your other observations about job titles, tuition reimbursements and resume building suggest a misalignment between your priorities and those of your former colleagues. We believe job titles should be descriptive, not honorific. We would rather pay larger bonuses to everyone than tuitions for some. But I think the root of the misalignment is the fact that Grant Street doesn't serve well as a stepping stone along a job-hopping career path in relentless pursuit of bigger and better things. It is, however, an ideal place for humble and hardworking people in pursuit of a fair wage, work-life balance, radical transparency (except their W-2), personal autonomy, job security, satisfied customers, and awesome co-workers with whom they share mutual respect. Thank you for your feedback, and we wish you all the best in your future endeavors.
1.0
Jul 12, 2024
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

While working here I met a ton of amazing people who were very kind and helpful. Asking questions in Slack was super convenient, and there was always someone willing to help. Lots of people reached out to me personally to welcome me and get to know me. The mentorship program was also nice as I had a great mentor. The pay and the benefits are good. I also appreciated the CEO reaching out to me personally about the feedback I provided before I left which makes me believe he does care about improving.

Cons

Upper-management were extremely unprofessional and very rude. They preached ownership and pushed you to ask questions but would use this against you if they didn't like you. Even when following upper-management's specific instructions when it came time to give feedback they find one specific area to focus on and make you feel like the whole project was completely wrong even when I would follow the examples provided exactly. When presenting my final presentation for bootcamp I took specific steps to check-in with management and my mentor to ensure I was on the right track and even demo'd my presentation to my mentor and was told the project looked good, and made the small changes he recommended. Despite all of this my project was ripped to shreds. I was supposed to come up with my solutions for the problem I was given and even though my solutions came directly from the feedback the SME's that have this specific problem, I was told my solutions made no sense and that my process was all wrong even though I had previously went over my process with management prior to the presentation. Anytime I would try to point out how there criticism didn't make sense, they would shut me down and make me feel stupid for even trying to protest what they were saying. After 20 minutes of 3 managers harshly ripping apart my presentation, they implied I wouldn't have a job after the weekend. I spoke with my mentor about the feedback and he ensured me things would be ok and to just do my best with listening to the feedback. The next day though I was fired. This is without me actually working with the manager I was hired to work under, and not working with the implementation team at all. I then had all my permissions taken away so I couldn't even say goodbye to my mentor. It was cruel.

avatar
Grant Street Group Response
2y
Response from our Executive Vice President of Operations: Thank you for your kind remarks about your former colleagues and the pay/benefits we offer. With regard to your criticism of what you describe as unprofessional and rude upper management, you are right that the conversations we have surrounding our attempts to help underperforming coworkers succeed can be difficult. When we are concerned that someone is off course during onboarding or at any other point in their career here, we begin by offering specific feedback on areas for improvement. If, after a reasonable period of time, there isn't sufficient improvement, we provide a plan that lays out the areas in which we need to see the person's performance improve and discuss the concerns directly with the person. The plan includes weekly or bi-weekly check-ins and feedback from management. Upper management's involvement at this stage is intended to show genuine interest in and commitment to the success of their coworker. If and when it becomes clear that the employee can't succeed, we proceed to separate, paying no less than 30 days severance. We firmly believe it would be a disservice to the underperformer and their coworkers to prolong employment much beyond the point when it becomes clear they can't succeed at Grant Street Group, but may have the ability to succeed elsewhere. We are always open to feedback on our processes, and we appreciate you sharing your experience with our CEO. Our intention is never to make people feel like they were not treated fairly, and in your case we failed to achieve that when we decided not to move forward with your onboarding. For that, I apologize.
Viewing 19 - 21 of 89 Reviews

Glassdoor has 101 Grant Street Group reviews submitted anonymously by Grant Street Group employees. Read employee reviews and ratings on Glassdoor to decide if Grant Street Group is right for you.