Mutual respect: There have been instances (multiple) where an employee was treated belligerently and nothing was done about it. This indicates that the company is more concerned, at least at the mid-management level, with performance than with people, or our company values.
Career growth: There have also been multiple instances where an employee was held back or rejected for a promotion due to teams being short-staffed, while people were hired from outside to fill those roles instead. Of course hiring people from outside is fine, but it seems that the company's priorities are not with personal career growth, but rather the company's growth as a whole. Individuals are also not treated, generally speaking, to clear career development paths. In many instances, they are left guessing what might be a good next step for them, and the onus is on the individual to forge a path for themselves. I do understand that career development is a privilege and not necessarily a right, however I also am aware that many companies take pride and a proactive role in growing employees from within.
Compensation: Our general pay is well below market average; raises typically come (for sales) in the form of on-target commission raises, not base pay (meaning there is no risk to the company, and in fact they save money), and bonuses are only granted, at least to the average worker, in the form of contests or stock. Stock offerings have decreased every year, and are roughly 10-20% of what they were 5 years ago. Organizational structure, compensation, and even accounting standards change each year, and as a result, compensation plans and quotas are not typically received until February, sometimes even March. Because of this, employees are working towards goals and pay that they don't even know until well into the year.
These things seem like an artifact of being a public company. Anything that has an effect on stock price takes priority. This is an organizational philosophy that is fine, as far as it goes, and if that's what the company chooses to prioritize, then that's their prerogative. However such values often conflict with our stated company values, making these seem like nothing more than empty talk. The impression some are left with is there is only a focus on the bottom line, and everything else is secondary. The company has a right, of course, to focus their effort and attention where they please. But for the purposes of this survey, it does not make it a "best place to work."
On the positive side, the product remains excellent, and the company is well-positioned for future growth, both technically and financially. This is not enough, however, to compensate for the lack of care and strategy for their human capital, at least as far as quality of work experience is concerned. Though I once proudly championed the company as an employer, and actively advocated for it among potential recruits, I do so no longer. I understand that as a company grows in headcount it is almost necessarily true that each employee is given less attention and is essentially less important. However many large enterprises have managed to maintain a focus on quality of work experience because it is a cornerstone of their success. It was once so with this company as well, but we have persistently failed to put in place programs and strategies to maintain this focus in parallel, and at the same scale, as our company headcount and revenue growth. If the company wishes to continue to attract and retain top talent, specifically in customer-facing roles, then these methods and priorities need to be addressed and corrected.
I also believe that this feedback is likely a waste of my time, because if an organization does not value employee feedback as highly as it ought, then of course the same fate will befall these comments.
