Pros: Great campus. Good work-life balance. Nice city.

Cons: Harsh winter weather Obsolete tech stack Poor management

Pros: 1. Decent payment. 2. Every software developer has their own office. 3. Great campus. 4. Co-workers are smart and nice.

Cons: 1. Use 80's supper old technology; still use VB6, not even VB.NET.

Pros: Epic shows its employees a tremendous amount of respect, and it's as much as I've ever hoped for in a relationship with an employer. As a developer, I'm given a great deal of leeway in how I complete assignments, including relatively flexible hours. Within my team at least, my colleagues maintain a wide variety of personal schedules, and it's never a problem. Everyone's extremely competent and gets their work done, and that's enough. The private offices are extremely nice. They're always growing too fast to have enough for everyone, but they're also constantly tossing up new buildings. New hires frequently double up for a while, but with a little patience, you really do get a private office. I spent a year at a satellite site in a cubicle before moving to campus proper, but once I did, my single year's experience was enough seniority to merit an office of my own. That's anecdotal and your mileage may vary, but even doubling up in an Epic office is superior to the alternatives out there, and no matter how you slice it, compared to more corporate environments, Epic employees get private offices at a fast rate. As a developer, I spent my first five months training. Epic invests an impressive amount of patience, time, and money in its new hires. By the time I began to receive real assignments, I felt extremely valued and well-prepared: a far cry from the way I've been thrown into the fire before. Considering the private offices, the casual dress code, and the high quantity and quality of training and resources provided, Epic is a tremendously comfortable place to work. They do a terrific job clearing away all the annoyances and barriers so everyone can keep their eyes on the ball. Epic also devotes itself admirably to proper development structure and processes. Best practices are well observed and frequently reinforced and improved, with strong tools provided and continuously updated. I can't speak for other roles, but Epic is a first-rate place to be a software developer. Other bonuses (not remotely a complete list): * a colorful and very non-corporate facility * a strong culture * exceptional IT and facilities support * free beverages * a solid cafeteria

Cons: Everyone's very motivated, which is good, but they're also often very busy. And when people are busy, one of the first things to fall by the wayside is performance feedback. Despite a documented schedule and process for formal performance reviews, I haven't had a single one in more than two years. I hope that no news is good news and that I'd get more feedback if there was a problem to warrant it -- but how would I know? I've gotten a comment here and there, but most of the feedback I've gotten I've had to ask for. OK for folks who are driven enough to extract feedback on their own, but the silence can get pretty wearying and unsettling for everyone else. Management comes in the form of team leads, colleagues of the same role (such as software developer or QA) who perform strongly enough in that role to catch someone's attention when there's an opening for a new team lead. Typically, a new lead starts off guiding 2-3 subordinates. But strong performance as a manager requires a significantly different skill set from what each role requires to excel. Epic provides training for new team leads, but it seems spotty and generally insufficient, considering the vast management skills material that it needs to cover. Not to mention team leads' time is valuable, and if something has to go, putting off the training is the first option. But training's a poor substitute for experience anyway, and for most new team leads, this is their first taste of what management really is. Gotta start somewhere, but this system frequently leads to team leads who are extremely skilled as peers but not immediately adept as managers. New hires are the employees most in need of assistance and feedback and guidance, but the way seniority works, they're also the ones who often wind up with new team leads, people who are least likely to be able to provide those things well. I spent my first two years working for a team lead who barely had any time for me. At least half my weekly workplan meetings (in theory an Epic requirement) were canceled, and the ones that did take place averaged less than 5 minutes. In my case, the problem was access and attention, not experience. But I just haven't perceived the same strong emphasis on management best practices that there is on, say, the software development cycle. It's perhaps a side effect of the expectation that we're all responsible adults and don't need that much management -- normally a good thing. But I hear more grumbling about team leads than anything else. Hiring is outpacing campus growth. It's nice to work for a healthy employer, but the crowd pressure is growing noticeably when it comes to private office availability and the ability to navigate the cafeteria.