GLG tries its hardest to give off the impression of a flexible, employee-first, start-up-esque culture but is actually a paternalistic, top-down environment. The culture can be confusing as a result because the messaging from company town halls does not line up with actual policies enacted or the day-to-day work environment.
As an example, the large offices are all open office concepts with (in theory) open seating, and activity-based working was a buzzword when I first started at the company. However, in practice, you are mandated to sit in the same place every day, in close proximity to your manager, because they do not trust you to get your work done, and face time is extremely important to the point where if you leave your assigned place for more than 15 minutes, your manager will start to frantically question where you are (or, if you’re a manager yourself, even if you want to allow your team more freedom, YOUR manager will get on your case if your team isn’t by your side at all times).
Unlimited vacation time was touted as a benefit when I joined the company, however in practice it’s totally at the discretion of your manager. So, if they think that an associate should only take 10 days per year, they will not approve further vacation days. There is no oversight for this from HR or senior leadership. Further, more recently the client solutions organization has begun mandating that at least one person per team is on call to work during official company holidays, i.e. days when the stock market is closed. The reward for working on a holiday? A work from home day (the company cannot reward a vacation day because employees in theory have “unlimited vacation”, though, again, in practice this is not true). As you can see, the reward systems get very wonky.
Work-life balance is non-existent for the client solutions organization, as clients submit requests and have research calls at all hours, and you are expected to respond to email after normal business hours as well. In the past the company has praised client solutions professionals for behavior such as waking up at 3 AM to ensure a call with an expert in Asia occurred successfully, rather than realizing that this is the type of behavior that leads to employee disengagement and burnout.
I did have some positive experiences at this organization, as detailed above, but have found that it is mostly dependent on who you happened to have assigned as your manager, which can change frequently. Over a period of 3 years I had 6 different managers, only 2 of which I felt truly were invested in my professional development. It was also very difficult to consistently pursue my long-term goals when I kept having to reset with new managers.
On the subject of managers, your ability to advance in the organization is totally dependent on your manager’s personal opinion of you, even if your numbers say otherwise. In year-end reviews, I heard managers express that employees who on paper had great metrics and seemed to be high performers were actually not going to be rated above average because the manager believed “they could do more”. Anecdotally, I know of multiple instances where employees asking about what they could improve to earn a promotion were belittled or laughed at by their managers. There is definitely an element of brown-nosing to upper management that is needed to advance here, to the point where engaged employees feel they can not offer constructive feedback for fear of it impacting their career progression.
At the end of my time at GLG I was very disappointed to not be offered an exit interview with HR, even though my colleagues who left at the same time did receive an exit interview. When I expressed this, a member of senior leadership did sit with me informally, which I appreciated. I hope my feedback will be taken to heart as I do still wish the best for GLG and its employees.
