Pros: Product ownership, responsibility, compensation, mission

Cons: Chaotic structure, lack of coordination.

Pros: Friendly environment. Employees do listen to your opinions.

Cons: Did not find any cons.

Pros: Given that most people visiting here would be considering job opportunities, or even job offers from TransferWise, let me just make it clear: this is a company that you won't regret joining. If you're confident, independent-thinking, self-motivated, and driven by doing the right things while learning from others, then this is the place. It's not without shortcomings, far from it, but compared to most companies, it is a unique place wherever you're in your career. But make sure you're prepared for a tough but fun ride with a lot of people that you'd like to work together, that is if you're acclimated to the culture. There are so many pros, but for a software developer (engineer), let me just tell you some facts, and you can be your own judge: * It is very product engineering driven. We're talking about many engineers not only knowing their trade well (good programmers) but also caring and having deep knowledge about the products. This is also reflected in the interview process, where there is a round of interview with a product manager for all engineering candidates. * The culture feels the same when it is >400 engineers now as when it was <100 engineers 2 years ago. Some companies would have simply met their final destination before hitting that number, and others would have different cultures that are so far from the original. Not at TransferWise. * There are so many friendly and collaborative fellow engineers, who would not hesitate to help if asked. Obviously, not everybody is like that, but the majority are very much so. The reason? Most of us share the same understanding of why we work at TransferWise and how we can achieve our mission, and being a humble contributor seems to be just the cure. * In terms of tech leads, IMHO, it is a highly selective group of people, and the bar has been held high so far. I'll say a bit more on the cons side below, but the pros side is that this makes sure we have the consistency which is key to preserve and evolve the culture. Most, if not all, the leads are solid developers, and more or less experienced in people management too. * Oh, did I mention that Kristo, the CEO, was/is a programmer? That's not just some stories PR would like to tell you. I've reviewed his code, and he cares about engineering. Nowadays, he doesn't voice his opinions on engineering any more, perhaps conscious of the weight his opinions may carry, but you can rarely find another unicorn CEO having the same profile. Compensation-wise, everybody owns part of the company, no matter how small (or big for some people) it is.

Cons: Let me say this first: every company has room for improvement, TransferWise is no exception. I've always kept a critical eye on things because I care about the company. The scale and field TransferWise is operating on is very different from other companies, so the problems we're facing sometimes expose our shortcomings. In engineering: * Tech leads are very overloaded. From the start, the requirement is that they have to be good at both engineering and people management (as we don't have an engineering manager setup like some other tech companies), as well as understand how TransferWise works. Any one of those would be a big ask, let alone three. I personally would start introducing engineering managers (people managers) in the structure. The recent career map on new IC levels also paves the way for some leads who may not want to pursue a people management career to stay on the technical track. * Speaking of career, it's hard to see us offering a lot. When we were small, it was all about having impact, not your title/level. Now we're relatively big, still with a very flat structure in engineering, there isn't much for a promising engineer to go up to, other than being a tech lead, which, as I mentioned above, is pretty overloaded/overworked. Hopefully, the new levels would help a bit, but we may need to change something more drastically to improve that. * Diversity: not that we don't care (at least I care deeply), it's tricky to make a start on this when you have an all-male and sometimes all-white interview line-up. There are some good initiatives, but we can definitely do more at intern/graduate/experienced levels. * Communication: it has improved greatly over time, but still has room for more. It's difficult given our global presence, but I'm confident we'll do better. * Compensation: no bonus or performance-related pay is fine when the company is small, as stock options are doing the job. As we grow, stock options may become less relevant, and to attract talent who may have a preference for cash over options, this is something we should consider.