Pros: Amazing people work there and you get to work with them. I loved working there and loved my job. Benefits are good, including good healthcare and good educational opportunities. Dan Gilbert is just an amazing human being and I was so proud to work there.

Cons: Became very corporate in the last few years. Layoffs are common now, so most people are stressed all the time that they are going to be laid off. It is not the same company that I was hired into. Bonuses went down drastically over the years. They made it very hard to meet expectations and change it every year. It is different for every train. New Senior Management created a very corporate, money-driven company. Going public was the beginning of the end, as perks and appreciation went way down from there.

Pros: Entry-level positions, if you're young or have not that much going on outside of work, are good.

Cons: Made-up job titles that don't match any industry standards and internal job seniority levels that either serve to keep folks at a lower pay range but tack on more responsibility or allow for vagueness in responsibilities that pigeonhole you to staying there and make it difficult to look for suitable and better-paying roles with other companies that have the same function. For example, a Business Analyst or Data Analyst may be called something else such as a Pod Review Support Specialist or Reporting Data Czar. The functions may be industry but the roles are not something that anyone outside of there would recognize. Given its vagueness, it allows for the company to set their own standard and range of pay, which is often much lower than other companies. They bank on the amenities and allure of the downtown Detroit area or false culture to get you to stay. This has fostered a toxic work environment. They talk about family and culture, but it's all surface-level at best. Furthermore, there is a push to embrace a "the only constant is change" mentality. This doesn't help when you have a faster change in leadership to where every new leader wants to change and shake up the status quo. Except the status quo never had a chance to kick off because the prior leader was only in the role for less than a few months. Their ISMs make sense, but overlap in theme and are not really followed unless it's convenient to push a bad idea through a business area. The only people that like it there are the people in charge or the people that don't know any better. The unfortunate part is they keep that ratio leaning to the people in charge side. You are not family and everyone is expendable at one point. You are conned into revealing personal parts of your life only for it to be used against you and as a way to keep you in an underpaid and overworked role.

Pros: Support hybrid and remote work model

Cons: Poor upper management constantly changing the team without asking.