Pros
From a researcher's perspective: * Hanover has more opportunities for advancement (promotion/raises) than any place I've ever worked at or even heard of * You're encouraged to think of new processes and improvements, and you're then given support to implement them * Interesting, varied work once you get past the entry-level position * Many opportunities to provide feedback on CDs/MCDs, regular check-ins where I can mention any issues as they arise * The ability to join client calls as a more experienced researcher, which adds another layer to the work * I literally get 36 days of PTO per year (12 paid holidays, 4 'team' holidays when we make goals, and 20 days of regular PTO), which is . . . crazy
Cons
Again, researcher's perspective: * Certain project types can get somewhat repetitive . . . but then I've never had a job that had zero repetitiveness. * Timelines can be tight in certain cases . . . but I'm almost always given extra time if I need it. * Salary beyond entry-level is competitive, but I wish there was a higher 401k match and slightly better health benefits. Also I feel the need to address the negative reviews from the past couple years: * I'm currently in my eighth year of working for Hanover (in research) and have been following Glassdoor reviews for a while . . . it's not a perfect company but it's way way better than the negative reviews suggest. (Also I can only speak to the research side of things, as I haven't spent time in sales.) * The vast majority of Hanover employees that I've interacted with over the past few years have been happy with the company (beyond the usual mild grumbling that you'll have in any workplace). The only people who seemed miserable were inevitably entry-level researchers in their first year who just didn't like the work or couldn't handle the work, and they usually quit after a few months (and then, apparently, all go straight to this website to complain) -- in short, I'm guessing that, in most cases, the negative reviews are from 22-year-olds who hadn't experienced a real workplace before (Hanover is my third multi-year consulting/research job, and easily my favorite), realized that an actual job is harder than coasting through college, and couldn't handle the (easy) workload. * Projects are relatively simple and repetitive when you first start at Hanover because management are trying to ease you into project work; if you're having to work 12-hour days to complete simple secondary research then you're the problem, rather than Hanover. Once you get past the introductory entry-level position, projects are varied, in-depth, and interesting (for the most part); Hanover reports are not "Googling keywords." * Entry-level salaries are a bit lower than usual, for sure, but all of the complaining reviewers clearly never managed to get promoted (or to get a merit raise), as promotions and raises are very generous; I'm currently making close to 2x my starting salary. * C-suite / MCDs / CDs are open and transparent and are constantly sending surveys, having 'coffee hours' where anyone can send questions or ask questions, etc. I've never worked at a company with more openness in that sense, so I'm just mystified by the complaints here.
