Nagarro Quality Associate reviews

It is very unfortunate that you had to quit Nagarro because of the negative perception and experience you had here. It is too late now to convince you to stay, however, I do want to take the time to respond to your review. I, of course, agree with the pros that you have mentioned - we have those and many more; but let me focus more on the cons that you experienced during your stay. Your distress about the CTC structure is understandable - you are not the only one who has provided feedback about it. We have taken the feedback and redesigned the CTC structure to be in line with industry best practices. The new CTC structure rolls out immediately for all new offers starting next week and for all existing employees in stepped manner over the next few months. Other than that though, some of the other 'cons' you mentioned are not necessarily true. For instance, no big clients and low quality projects - our clients range from some of the worlds largest companies (Fortune 500), to some of the world's most innovative, who are leaders in their domains. The projects we do are some of the most challenging ones available (airline ticket pricing systems, aircraft engine parts manufacturing software, music streaming services, airport ground logistics, public health portals, emergency planning software used by the biggest oil companies, complex lighting design and control solutions, r&d for world leading security systems, and the list could go on and on). It is our failure that during the short time that you spent with us, we were not able to make you aware of what we do, thus leaving you with an impression that we have no big accounts or only work on trivial projects. With regards to 'lack of infrastructure', I am not sure what you mean. For a company our size, we have a very decent infrastructure both in terms of the work environment and in terms of the facilities available to the employees. I would love to get specific feedback on where you think we can improve. Our appraisal system is meant to be very transparent. With recent changes, we have also made it much more objective than it was earlier. The whole premise of the system is that you should be able to examine and, if needed, challenge the feedback received through it multiple times a year instead of just at the end of the year. But it seems that, at least in this case, it has not come across as transparent and I wish that we could meet so that I could hear what the shortcoming was and address it in the future. Finally, about your comment about an internal communication: I find it worrisome that we are sending such communication. We don't need it. This is the action of one individual and not reflective of the approach that we take as a company. At the same time, I would like to know more about this and I request you to take the time to get in touch with me on this (just reach out to anyone in HR). BTW, we do not have a Director of Engineering designation in the company. At the end, I do want to thank you for taking the time to leave feedback. Feedback always makes us better. It would be great if you can reach out for the points mentioned above.