Slalom used to be a strong company with a solid reputation (around a 4.5-star experience), especially before and during the early stages of COVID. There were many smart, capable, and genuinely good people to work with, and collaboration within teams was often positive.
However, after about a year into COVID, the culture noticeably shifted. The primary value emphasized became revenue and growth targets, with frequent focus on how quickly the company could reach higher financial milestones. As this shift happened, many experienced and respected team members began leaving, which further impacted team stability and morale.
While there are still talented individuals within the organization, the overall experience changed significantly as people and culture took a back seat to numbers and delivery metrics.
I am sharing this feedback based on my direct experience.
Over an extended period, I was subjected to repeated one-on-one meetings that were not focused on growth or support, but instead centered on persistent criticism and personal devaluation. These meetings frequently began with statements questioning whether I deserved my role, my compensation, or my title. This pattern created ongoing psychological pressure rather than constructive feedback.
One of the most damaging situations involved being held solely responsible for managing a difficult team dynamic that was clearly impacting the project and client delivery. I escalated concerns appropriately and requested leadership guidance or support. Despite this, I was instructed to manage the situation independently and was later repeatedly reminded that I had “failed” in handling it, even though no leadership intervention or support was provided.
Over time, a strong culture of fear developed. Interactions felt punitive rather than supportive, and communication became guarded and defensive. I felt constant pressure to monitor my words, behavior, and even normal professional interactions out of concern that they could later be used against me. This environment discouraged openness, collaboration, and honest dialogue, and replaced them with anxiety, self-censorship, and fear of repercussions.
There was also a strong culture of rank-based control. I was explicitly warned against interacting with senior leaders beyond a certain level, as if normal professional communication required permission. Even respectful and appropriate interactions with leadership were later framed as inappropriate, reinforcing fear, isolation, and a sense of not belonging.
Performance discussions followed a repeated and rigid pattern: framing issues as either a lack of care or a lack of competence, without acknowledging context, effort, or external constraints. Positive feedback from clients, architects, and team leads was dismissed outright, undermining objective evidence of performance and creating confusion and self-doubt.
Over time, this environment resulted in severe stress, anxiety, and physical symptoms. I remained in the role longer than I should have due to professional responsibility, family obligations, and ongoing project commitments—not because the environment was healthy or sustainable.
In my experience, this was not a psychologically safe workplace. Empathy, accountability, and ethical leadership were lacking, and harmful behaviors were allowed to continue without consequence.
• Stop normalizing fear-based management and humiliation as feedback. • Address leadership gaps instead of placing blame on individuals. • Foster genuine psychological safety and open communication. • Hold leaders accountable for how they treat people, not only for delivery metrics.
He will first introduce himself. Then, it will talk about school projects and then ask you some technical questions about web programming, OOP, and something around quality assurance testing.
A lot of briefing of the current Quality Engineering process at Slalom helped me understand the work culture a lot. The questions were asked along with the process described. Overall, it was a pleasant experience.
Basic behavioral questions, phone interview, on-campus interview (both behavioral and technical), meeting with the rest of the team. It took a week or so to get back to me with a reply.
He will first introduce himself. Then, it will talk about school projects and then ask you some technical questions about web programming, OOP, and something around quality assurance testing.
A lot of briefing of the current Quality Engineering process at Slalom helped me understand the work culture a lot. The questions were asked along with the process described. Overall, it was a pleasant experience.
Basic behavioral questions, phone interview, on-campus interview (both behavioral and technical), meeting with the rest of the team. It took a week or so to get back to me with a reply.