Mattermark reviews

- Management is strong con. CEO does not seem qualified to run a tech company seems more like a better fit would be a marketing exec or writer. CEO also demonstrates lacks of respect for CTO role. (CTO is actually a real star). Management team as a whole is weak, and favoritism is strong. (ex: People with no experience / skills given executive / C-level power, employees pressured to spend free time with management, experienced employees seen as threat) - Product is loaded with technical debt. Made some poor decisions at the beginning and still paying for it. - Price point greatly outweighs value (and the teams knows it); however more time is spent correcting recurrent problems than adding new value points. - Employee churn. Management churns through employees at higher rate than average at startups ...seems employees are let go to justify product problems. -Market too small. Company has yet to crack this code, and not many attractive exit opportunities here.

The marketing is very strong: "we're going to use machine learning to solve the hundreds of business analysts" problem that our competitors have. That sounds great and it's a really great idea. However, the implementation of that is lagging. Simply look at the teams page to see how much the company has invested in machine learning. Go to LinkedIn and see who has joined and left. To make the idea a reality will require a huge investment in machine learning. Take a look at the team page and compare the size of the data team to the machine learning team. The company is very heavy on personal relations. On the surface, this seems fine however there is a convoluted collection of cliques. One clique is friends of the founders. It was interesting seeing them join and then get invited to management-only meetings. That doesn't happen now -- it's probably been moved to private chat channels. Communication is overall extremely poor. At first, the Friday meetings seem great however eventually you realize that it is just a "roll out the employees and force them to listen to what should be a 5 minute email". The only transparency is around burn rate and sales. It's great to have but it's not enough and the forced nature of the meeting is silly. Chronic issues like the office temperature regularly shooting up to 80 degrees go unaddressed for months if not years. As an employee, it was a very odd experience. It's as if the people leading this have no clue about basic operation needs. On the engineering side, you'll find ownership extends to code reviews. Work between team members is poorly coordinated. The product team likes doing big reveals and not involving the engineering team beyond implementation. If you care about driving things forward rapidly in a way that grows values, you're going to step on toes and the inexperience of the management team will bite you. And that really sums it all up. Strong and sometimes vicious "in" group, lots of group thinking, apparently a fair amount of communication out band, strong marketing, weak implementation and strained relations between the employees. If you can handle all of that, the pay and benefits are great -- options a little weak.