Ipsos reviews

A lot... where to begin... - Remuneration is sub-par. Competitors offer much more than what Ipsos can even top-up as a counter-offer to retain an outgoing employee (if that ever happens). - Slowly there is a culture of "fame matters the most" being developed. In that, there is more emphasis on SELLING, without knowing whether there is capacity (or at times even capability) to execute projects or not. Often leads to a mentality of "Let's sell first... we'll figure out how to execute it later." Once sold (read: fame acquired), the 'sellers' often distance themselves from the actual execution and the researchers working on the project are left somewhat stranded in terms of knowing what to do in the 'sold' project, because someone else has sold something weird to satisfy their own whims. - A lot of times, we force "unsuitable" "new" methodologies/tools down the clients' throats. All a client needs is some quick surveys or focus groups, but we push for newer methodologies to the client. Not all clients need new methodologies always. There is just no proper judgment of what client needs and more importantly what can we execute. It's no bravery to commit something new to the client and not know how to do it. - "Let's sell it first, we'll figure it out later". - Continuing the previous point, researchers are expected to learn and get trained new methodologies, models and tools on-the-go. Let's sell first, we'll figure it out later... Sounds good, but the problem is, given the immense workload created by such an aggressive 'sell' leaves very little time for the researcher to get trained properly. Neither can a researcher split himself/herself in halves to assign one to train and one to execute projects, nor does a day have 48 hours to complete projects and trainings all in one. There is just no regard for people's time (within and outside of work hours). You need to have dedicated time to train researchers if they are going to use something new on projects. Expecting them to learn on-the-project is risky for both, the project as well as the researcher. - Because the emphasis is on a SELL, basics are usually ignored in proposals - no clear target audience definitions, no clear timelines, no clear project teams and functions of each team members, often with costs based on experience rather than systematic margin calculations - let's sell first, we will discuss it later at the kick-offs! This whole attitude of SFFIOL (Sell First, Figure It Out Later) seems nice for the time-being (targets achieved), but it is harmful in the long run (burned out researchers, risk of sub-par deliverables).