The company has an extremely toxic work environment. Leadership and co-workers frequently engage in violent communication, influenced by a CEO who uses passive-aggressive tone in speeches and emails, making it evident that employee opinions hold little importance and suggesting they could find employment elsewhere if they disagree. Technologically, the company is chaotic, with numerous poor code and architectural decisions. Quality and best practices are overlooked, and the focus remain on "quick wins." Consequently, the company perpetuated unsustainable architectures, leading to frequent issues. These decisions were predominantly made by staff engineers, leaving little room for input unless one had personal connections with them. For women in engineering roles, for example, the company offers no growth path. Promotion to staff engineer or leadership positions was primarily reserved for men who were friends with company leaders. Despite claiming to value high performance, the company maintained incompetent and aggressive engineers in leading roles, resulting in problematic technical choices. The company's values appeared superficial, as the culture contradict them. Ego-driven individuals persist despite the company's claim to value an egoless environment. While professing to be data-driven, most teams make decisions without data, and product owners conjure up random roadmaps without solid foundations. Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DE&I) initiatives rely solely on employee efforts through Employee Resource Groups (ERGs), as the C-level executives show little support. Executives use employees' hard work on DE&I primarily for performative LinkedIn posts, disregarding their contributions during performance reviews. The CEO made it clear that these were solely employee initiatives, indicating a lack of genuine care or action.
