It appears that the company has recently begun putting undue pressure on some of the more experienced employees, citing performance concerns. However, the underlying issue seems to be related to project closures — when client projects end and team members are reassigned to internal or other projects, the expectations from management become unrealistic.
Employees are often expected to work excessively long hours, sometimes up to 16 hours a day and even on weekends, regardless of actual workload. This approach seems intended to push people out of the company under the guise of “performance culture.”
Over time, the company’s work environment has become increasingly difficult, and the overall culture seems to be deteriorating. Growth appears stagnant, with limited progress in business, sales, or marketing — most of the external communication revolves around leadership promotions and visibility.
Senior management tends to align closely with the CEO’s directives, often executing instructions without questioning, which creates a top-down, one-way culture.
The expectations from managers appear to be heavily influenced by the CEO’s direction. While public communication emphasizes motivation, inspiration, and a “people-first” mindset, the internal reality often feels quite different.
The organization seems to function under a “my way or no way” philosophy, offering little flexibility, and requiring employees to be physically present in the office daily, with long working hours.
-The company’s “people-first” claim is misleading and contradicts its internal practices.
-Marketing teams focus on boosting the CEO’s social media presence (likes, shares, followers) instead of generating business leads or sales.
-Favoritism is rampant — senior employees who engage in flattery or “boot-licking” receive special privileges and benefits.
-Employee performance is judged by time spent in the office rather than actual productivity or output.
-Salary hikes are minimal (typically 3–5%) and often depend on being in a manager’s good books; bonuses are rare or nonexistent.
-The company charges clients over USD 4,000 per month but assigns the work to freshers or entry-level employees, compromising quality.
-Overcommitment to clients results in resource burnout and excessive workloads for employees.
-Overall, the organization reflects a toxic, exploitative culture driven by favoritism, overwork, and misplaced priorities.
-Company claims there are no layoffs but its just a myth if the resource are not required they are forcefully put on PIP or forced to put down papers.
From available information, the company’s annual revenue is around ₹300 crore, with a profit margin of about 7–8%. The CEO reportedly holds around 36% ownership and receives a salary in the range of ₹16 crore annually — which appears quite high relative to the company’s valuation and profit. This imbalance creates the impression that the burden of operational success is being placed disproportionately on employees, while leadership benefits disproportionately. What is labeled as a “high-performance culture” often feels more like exploitation than empowerment.
