Meraki reviews

Pay is significantly below market rate and management won't even bother to counter market rate offers. The tech stack we're working with is getting old in the tooth and it's starting to show, with few plans to upgrade to anything even remotely modern. They've put in a new leveling structure and are starting to roll it out across the organization. However, there realistically are few if any options to actually get promoted. Most new hires are straight out of college and come here because they don't know what everyone else pays. Anyone experienced tends to come from somewhere else in Cisco. We're growing quickly, but almost all of that growth comes from our mature products. 2 out of the 3 new products that were released after the acquisition have had little to no market success. Management doesn't seem to care and staffs those teams with the most junior engineers. As a result, it's only a matter of time before those teams fail and people leave. Mentorship for junior staff doesn't exist. It's sink or swim in the sense that you need to figure it out yourself and if you don't, no one seems to care.

- The aforementioned diversity issue; though unfortunately not any worse than any other place I've worked. And as I stated earlier, it's an actual priority of management. - Some process aspects are not perfect, something typical of a formally smaller company transitioning into another tier. * Career ladder is not well defined though new guidelines have been released recently for some roles * I was asked a few algorithmic coding questions when I interviewed which I personally think are poor for determining candidate quality. But there are no formal reviews around interview questions like tracking how they correlate to job performance later, or if they favor certain types of candidates, etc. which I think would be useful. I was asked one very open ended collaborative project type question in my last on site interview though, so there are individual interviewers that go above and beyond. - Management can sometimes seem like they're figuring it out as they go along, which they are. A Google study found that the least important quality in a manager is technical expertise; great news for the mostly MIT PhD upper management! Jokes aside, even though many managers have fallen upward by nature of being there earlier as more people were hired (very standard), none are complacent or stuck in their ways. Every manager I've seen is held accountable by both themselves and others and is always trying to improve, which is better than 95% of other places.