Tesla

It looks good on your resume. Everyone gets excited if they hear that you're working at Tesla. The company's work really is helping to change the world (at least through the inspiration of competing electric cars).

Poor leadership (see the "Advice to Management" section).

The organization is very hierarchical, and I far more often heard arguments than cooperative conversations.

It's a very high-pressure environment, so don't expect an exceptional work/life balance.

Everyone seems to think that they can get hired as an associate or technician and work their way up to some highly advanced position. You need to understand that it's not a startup anymore. There are fixed roles in the organization, and an enthusiasm about cars doesn't qualify you to be an engineer in the company's eyes. (No, I wasn't one of the people who thought this way, but I met enough of them that I thought it was worth noting.)

(This is all, of course, speaking from experience in one segment of the company, but I'd say this is food for thought.)

The primary means of getting things done doesn't appear to be problem-solving but, rather, applying pressure to the people beneath you. This gets carried to such an extreme that often the emphasis shifts from giving actual results to giving the APPEARANCE of results to satisfy your superiors. I've seen this happen at all levels, and I earnestly think it's a "trickle-down" effect, judging from what I hear from those higher up. This, of course, can lead to poor results in the long term, but few people are so noble as to jeopardize their jobs in the short term for the long-term good of the company. Rather than simply making demands, I recommend starting conversations about the difficulties and requirements of a process and trying to problem-solve with people.

Instructions are often handed down as absolutes, typically without explanation or any room for feedback. This is unfortunate, since the individuals closer to the processes in question often have useful insights. If you keep people out of the loop on the grounds that "you're in charge," you miss out on relevant information and have fewer eyes and minds on the problem at hand. Perhaps, before the time comes to make a decision, when you've first noticed a potential problem, talk to the people involved and get their feedback, even if the people are only technicians or associates. If you explain why decisions were made, this helps on multiple levels too.

For starters, it helps with motivation, because people don't feel like they're being arbitrarily ordered around. Additionally, if people understand the actual goals behind the instructions they're given, it allows them greater versatility and thoroughness in serving that goal. In other words, they can serve the principle of the law, not just the letter.

Rumors abound about individuals who made a mistake and were fired on the spot for it. Whether or not these stories are true, it engenders a culture of fear among employees. This doesn't result in an absence of mistakes (which is impossible), but rather, mistakes are denied and covered up. In this situation, mistakes are slower to be identified (if they're identified at all), slower to be corrected (if at all), and there's less opportunity for learning on the part of individuals and the institution.

Try to encourage an open environment that allows people to come forward without so much fear of reprisals. (To paraphrase Deming: "What, are you going to fire every person who makes mistakes and hire only people who don't make mistakes?") I know there's lip service to an open environment, but having the CEO's email address doesn't count for much if you receive semi-threatening orders from your superiors NOT to email Elon about something, nor do people necessarily feel comfortable giving earnest feedback to senior management when you hear things like, "People who don't tell Elon what he wants to hear don't last long."