LinkedIn

The only pro is above-average compensation.

Managers are very good at lying. Whereas Uber's negatives can be easily seen at its surface, LinkedIn's management are masters at underhanded tactics and at crafting a positive facade on the outside. I think the key considerations for managers are plausible deniability and what they can get away with.

Highly political and high stress levels, both of which create an unhealthy work environment with lots of finger-pointing that are often accompanied by lies and distortions. The senior management, especially Jeff Weiner, have little idea of what is possible and reasonable, so their management technique is to squeeze the employees until the people or the software, etc., break. This is the reason for the above-average compensation, because many people would otherwise escape as soon as they can.

Extremely hierarchical company, with little respect for rank-and-file employees. Managers are unjustifiably assumed to know better, and obedience is expected. There are a few teams with good managers that shield the engineers, but what I describe is the general culture. Instead of rational and thoughtful discussions, throughout the company one often hears the conversation-stopping reason: "this is what Jeff wants."

None. The management needs to be replaced. The biggest challenge of working at LinkedIn is dealing with the management and the people who suck up to them.