I left prior to the changes in compensation structure. However, in my time there, the company had a highly varied pay structure based on merit. Incentive pay based on individual performance and company results equaled almost 100% of my base salary. It was a great environment to work for strong contributors with confidence in their own abilities.
Chronic inability to invest to make markets. Michael and the executive leadership struggle to set reasonable expectations when playing catch-up with limited investment in established markets. The company is on a long, slow glide to bottoming out on mediocre profitability. This limits the ability to reward good performance as well as the opportunities for intellectual growth.
Turnover is required on Michael's executive leadership to bring in alternative perspectives of running the business. Too much of the leadership is risk-averse and cost-focused.
Round Robin format with 5 interviewers on the agenda. Interviewers were relaxed and friendly. The questions ranged from simple to vague. Skill levels of some interviewers were questionable.
Was an internal hire. The interview process was standard: * 2-3 phone interviews * A personal loop with 4-6 individuals All interviewers provided a rated response to determine hireability.
It was fairly easy; I had to make a presentation on a product and share it with the team. It took about one to two hours. I liked having to present a deck to the team.
Round Robin format with 5 interviewers on the agenda. Interviewers were relaxed and friendly. The questions ranged from simple to vague. Skill levels of some interviewers were questionable.
Was an internal hire. The interview process was standard: * 2-3 phone interviews * A personal loop with 4-6 individuals All interviewers provided a rated response to determine hireability.
It was fairly easy; I had to make a presentation on a product and share it with the team. It took about one to two hours. I liked having to present a deck to the team.