The technical staff are overall very competent and solid. (But I don't know whether this can be maintained in spite of turnover.)
Software leadership is incompetent and toxic, kissing up and kicking down. Leaders insist on making poor decisions, then pass blame when results are bad. Salary compensation is really low compared to what one can get elsewhere. To make up for this, offers are accompanied by manipulative "sales tactics" around the future value of one's equity.
Companies should play to their strengths and focus resources on teams and projects which are achieving success. Where development is not going well, the sunk cost fallacy must be rejected and difficult decisions must be made, including potentially replacing poor decision-makers. Bad news should travel fast up the chain of command.
It's good for the CEO to be optimistic and a cheerleader. But it's equally important to not get high on one's own supply: to value disagreement from loyal managers, rather than ego-stroking from yes-men. Otherwise, one may end up surrounded by unqualified sociopathic managers, unaware of how things are really going.
I applied through a recruiter. They have a very frustrating interview process. After the initial screening, which may or may not happen twice, they have a take-home programming quiz where you're probably going to spend hours on random things like se
This was the worst interview process of my life. The people were generally nice, but the logistics and the last-minute changes were not only annoying, they reflected a general lack of respect for the candidate's time. Maybe MIT should have included s
Be prepared to follow up for each round. I followed up to push the process for every round, and for the final round, I did it twice. But the recruiter ghosted. I think it's very disrespectful, especially if the candidate made it to the final round. I
I applied through a recruiter. They have a very frustrating interview process. After the initial screening, which may or may not happen twice, they have a take-home programming quiz where you're probably going to spend hours on random things like se
This was the worst interview process of my life. The people were generally nice, but the logistics and the last-minute changes were not only annoying, they reflected a general lack of respect for the candidate's time. Maybe MIT should have included s
Be prepared to follow up for each round. I followed up to push the process for every round, and for the final round, I did it twice. But the recruiter ghosted. I think it's very disrespectful, especially if the candidate made it to the final round. I