On the surface, the company appears to have positive reviews, but many of these are influenced and encouraged by HR.
----- Lack of Vision -----
* The Retail/Payments ERP division lacks a defined product roadmap or strategic direction, leading to reactive and inconsistent decision-making.
* Business goals are often unclear or misaligned with technical execution, resulting in low-impact releases.
* Innovation and long-term product planning receive minimal attention, causing stagnation in both the platform and the teams.
* Teams are largely operating in silos, without alignment on broader objectives or cohesive technical direction.
----- Weak Leadership -----
* The Engineering VP lacks both technical expertise and leadership skills, leading to poor guidance and low team morale.
* Success is narrowly tracked using "story points", a flawed and inconsistent metric that varies between teams and doesn't reflect actual business value.
* There’s little to no focus on outcome-driven development, user-centric design, or measurable feature impact.
* Strategic decisions are often arbitrary or politically driven, rather than based on data or industry best practices.
----- Poor Management -----
* The India-based development team Director provides minimal strategic or operational value, and could likely be replaced by a fresher with little to no impact on the team.
* Managers across Development, QA, Product Ownership, and Business Analysis lack clarity on their responsibilities and frequently fail to communicate expectations effectively.
* Delivery timelines are poorly managed due to a lack of ownership and understanding within leadership.
* Cross-functional collaboration is weak, with planning meetings often resulting in unproductive discussions and no actionable outcomes.
----- Resistance to Change -----
* Many decision-makers are nearing retirement and have been with the company for decades, leaving them disconnected from current software development practices and industry advancements.
* Their understanding of the software development lifecycle is outdated, with limited interest in adopting modern engineering standards, tools, or methodologies.
* Efforts to implement modern processes, automation, or best practices are often met with resistance and dismissed as unnecessary, typically under the pretext of "avoiding additional work".
* The leadership's reluctance to evolve creates a stagnant environment where innovation is limited and teams remain stuck in legacy workflows.
----- Inflated Titles, Deflated Skills -----
* Many “senior” engineers operate at a junior level, handling basic maintenance and patchwork tasks instead of driving technical design or architecture.
* The current managers, directors, and VPs in engineering are unfit for their roles, significantly hindering the overall growth of the product.
* Although the product is positioned as a “cloud-based” solution, a substantial portion of the engineering team lacks fundamental knowledge of cloud development.
* There's a noticeable gap between job titles and actual capabilities, which becomes evident during cross-functional discussions, peer reviews and leadership interactions.
----- Toxic Environment -----
* Layoffs have disproportionately targeted individuals who raise questions or advocate for higher standards, discouraging critical thinking and transparency.
* Retained employees often maintain their position through alignment with leadership rather than performance, creating a culture of sycophancy.
* New hires are often tasked with high-risk work and are implicitly warned, often with threats of termination, not to questioning existing norms, fostering a culture of fear and silence.
* Psychological safety is low, teams operate under constant pressure, with an unspoken “don’t speak up” rule in place.
----- Career Stagnation -----
* Skills gained in this environment rarely align with market standards, making external transitions difficult after 2–3 years.
* There's minimal support for career development, learning, or upskilling, employees are expected to maintain legacy systems with no real growth path.
* Promotions and role transitions are not merit-based, which demotivates high-performing individuals.
* Management is fully aware of this dynamic and depends on employee stagnation to retain staff, instead of promoting genuine engagement or career growth.
