Pros: • Fantastic internal dev tools • High-octane, smart, largely friendly coworkers • Commitment to flexibility of a fully remote working culture • Focus on continual employee growth, with financial and career upside

Cons: • High-performance culture has only gotten more intense over time. • Widely unpopular productivity metrics that track weekly PR count, Slack channel support requests resolved, and individual vs. team velocity. • Management model of tech lead + EM means the person actually responsible for performance and compensation reviews barely interacts with their engineers on a daily basis (especially when fully remote). • On-call load can get horrendous between PagerDuty alerts and support channel questions. • Campy, inauthentic top-level leadership trying to run a large, mature public company like a 2010s-era Silicon Valley startup. HubSpot has become obsessed with squeezing higher productivity out of their software engineers, going from literal "green squares" tracking on GitHub to a set of manufactured velocity metrics on an internal dashboard where managers can compare individual performance to that of other members of the team. Look around at the other reviews on here and peer online company discussion platforms. Talented and hard-working engineers are being PIPed and let go with poor justification of not meeting delivery expectations based on highly subjective interpretation of contribution metrics. The competitive environment breeds manufactured stress and discontent within the engineering org due to the constant push for development speed at all costs. The caveat here is, while all engineering teams are tracked by the same performance metrics, it's largely up to your relationship with your tech lead and your manager to bring context to those numbers when it comes time to evaluating individual contributor performance. There are pockets of HubSpot engineering that, while maybe not "chill," are at least more supportive or have better team collaboration dynamics that can make it possible to thrive within the system.

Pros: best recruiting cycle and, initially, good transparency

Cons: Lack of direction, awful relationship with product, and shady hiring.

Pros: There's brilliant people at this company, mostly from the individual contributor level. As most companies, your manager is a make or break for culture, but most managers are fine to work under. AI use is encouraged, and not shoved down your throat

Cons: Leadership has no backbone on what they want from you as a team, and managers bleed that down into ICs. Directions change with "this is the new Priority Zero" with no conversation from the people that own the feature. As though leadership finds a shiny new object (read: something that might please shareholders) and will move toward it without conversation. Then when the "I told you so phase" comes in when things stress people out, they're already moving to the next shiny thing. Growth is not actually real here, don't believe that suggestion. Can you grow, yes. But it's despite the company more than encouraged by it. "Move fast" definitely takes priority. I've had excellent colleagues laid off recently, with no good reasoning as to why other than "restructuring."