Microsoft

Great health benefits, lots of capital to invest in long-term projects, and many smart people who are great to work with.

The bell-curve approach to assigning review scores that Microsoft uses is designed to promote competition.

In reality, though, especially on a team of top performers, the folks on the left side of the curve end up feeling more discouraged than encouraged to compete.

Creating a competitive culture where employees must stand out relative to their peers can negatively impact teamwork and cooperation as well, since those seeking a good review will spend extra effort trying to get noticed for their contributions.

This flies in the face of advice given by renowned leadership gurus Dale Carnegie and Stephen Covey—ironically, training and books that Microsoft provides to its employees.

Another downside I've noticed is that the company places a very high value on raw intelligence but a lot less value on leadership, management ability, and human relations.

Perhaps less so now than in the past, but still, Microsoft has many managers who were previously programmers who ended up in management due more to their seniority than their suitability as managers or leaders.

If you work for one of these managers, your career can suffer, especially if there are better managers whose employees are getting better career advice, support, internal PR, etc., within the group you're measured against.

Read the books in your own library on leadership and human relations.

Take Dale Carnegie Training.

Stop pitting good employees against each other in the review process.

Focus on creating a culture of true teamwork and discourage people who toot their own horn for acknowledgment.