Springbot reviews about "manager"

Compensation Lack of promotions Commission structure

Secret meeting of the “in-group” on the sales side. This seems to have very little to do with performance and much more to do with if they like you, Meeting where people are yelled at by managers for reasons unknown to the majority, extremely passive aggressive, Unrealistic metrics sent down by people who clearly dont understand the market, High customer churn masked by creative narrative writing on the part of the top level folks,

Boiler room sales floor with high pressure managers and tactics.

- springbot is a transactional sales cycle. Not to say this is a bad thing but I don’t recommend it for everyone. Very high pressure sales and high pressure expectations. Being a monthly sales cycle can be draining and not a great fit for everyone. If you’re the work hard play hard type, hungry to get paid, maybe an athlete or former “hype man” amongst your friends it’s probably a great fit for you!! - base salary less than average on the market but commission can make up for that - not a lot of room for upward movement into senior leadership roles but milestone promotions keep pay progressive - product is in a saturated market - LOTS of competition but very few that do it in a consolidated platform such as springbot - granted some of this competition starts at $0 cost and springbot @ $299 - does affect the selling process - yes. Colony square is literally a war zone of construction

Management is a joke. It’s a frat essentially and the perfect example of being a good salesman doesn’t translate into being a good manager.

The divisions within the company are unusually strong for its small size, and I saw them getting worse as it grows. The sales team seems to get the most priority from the top and the least respect from everyone else; from the outside, that side of the office often seems like a daytime frat party. For all the growth and new investment, the development team has stayed nearly the same size for years, and views itself as undervalued. New software requirements and deadlines are too often determined by other teams without input from those who will be doing the work. Usability and acceptance decisions are made by non-technical managers, not by customers. Employees are expected to provide their own computers to do their work. It took years for them to offer an inadequate stipend for this, and the result is a chaotic mix of technologies with no one in charge of supporting them. This always struck me as bizarre, and my concerns that it was hurting them in recruiting developers were met with shrugs. Training and advancement opportunities are mediocre. In the time I was on the dev team, exactly one internal employee made it to a management/architecture and stayed there. Their concept of an education program is to reimburse 50% on books, conferences (not travel), and so forth after the fact. It's very hard for developers to switch roles to things they'd be better at, and decisions affecting the team as a whole are often opaque.

Just like a lot of high volume sales jobs it's a grind, a lot of ups and downs and seasonality. If you're new to tech it can take a while to fully grasp everything and be fully ramped up hitting monthly goals but as long as you are a sponge and take advantage of all the people and resources along with of course working hard you will succeed.