What is the hiring process like at Pearson?

decent benefits and an easy hiring process

Company is not loyal, and bottom line is what matters most

No pros for this company

Recruitment process of Pearson is horrible. I got an email saying my Cb looks great and that I have been selected for interview and booked the calendar. An hour before the interview Pearson Talent Acquisition called me to say the position I applied no longer exist and then after 2 days they are sending me email saying they have selected some other applicants as their skills were suitable. I don't care if they didn't select me. Company is no longer trustworthy as they dont have transparency. I am quiet glad that I was not selected as I wouldn't like to work with such untrustworthy company who lies to their applicants.

You will probably die earlier than you would have otherwise - which means less time on the job. The sleep you lose from working overtime will be countered by the sleep you gain from crippling depression.

This was easily the most bs job I have had in my life. And the worst kind - the kind where you were supposed to pretend your work mattered. Managers and middle managers and process specialists are out to destroy not merely career but your very soul, every spiritual cell in your body.

Pearson's culture, in my experience, is very supportive of employees. Everyone is accessible for questions, the onboarding is thorough, and managers are committed to ensuring you are set up for success. They also take feedback incredibly well. In my second contract role, I reached out to a director to provide feedback about issues I had noticed in efficiency with the team I was working on, and she was extremely attentive and receptive, and acted on that feedback. As a relatively new employee at the time, the fact that I was made comfortable to provide such feedback was itself a testament to the culture that had been established.

Compensation does not always feel fully commensurate to the amount of work required.

The team I worked in offers a largely remote working environment, which provides great flexibility. Due to the sheer size of the organisation, there is potential for a lot of opportunities to move around and explore different roles.

I can only speak to the team I was part of rather than the entire organization. While there were some positives, my experience was challenging due to issues with leadership, team dynamics, and work-life balance. The onboarding process felt disorganized and passive. There was little structured introduction to the team, minimal guided support, and no immediate access to key systems. Instead, I received a Word document with links to presentations and intranet articles—some of which were outdated or restricted. This lack of structure made it difficult to integrate smoothly and get up to speed. The biggest challenge for me was maintaining well-being in this environment. I observed that long days were common, and there was little emphasis on taking breaks, with some colleagues joking about skipping lunch regularly. Additionally, emails were frequently sent late into the evening and over weekends, making it difficult to disconnect. While this may work for some, I personally found it unsustainable due to the lack of clear support in setting boundaries. Beyond workload concerns, the team environment often felt unpredictable and, at times, tense. In one instance, after following what I believed to be the correct guidance, I encountered an unexpectedly harsh and unprofessional response from a colleague. Rather than engaging in a constructive discussion, the reaction was aggressive and dismissive, making it difficult to address the issue collaboratively. This response left me feeling unsupported and contributed to an overall sense of unease within the team. Over time, the stress from these dynamics negatively impacted my mental well-being. Eventually, I needed to take sick leave for my final two weeks. During this time, the only communication I received was a reminder of the company’s sick leave policy, which felt impersonal given the circumstances. After resigning, I requested an exit interview to share my feedback constructively. Instead of discussing a suitable time, a meeting was scheduled without consulting me. When I asked for alternative dates, I never received a response. Overall, my experience highlighted areas for improvement in leadership, communication, and team culture. While Pearson may offer great opportunities in other teams, I would encourage anyone considering this specific environment to assess whether it aligns with their expectations for support, structure, and work-life balance.

Remote, $2300 a month for not that many hours of work.

The widespread incoherence of Pearson is irritating me to a significant degree. -the hiring committee mentioned the wrong pay rate so I spent a month worrying about money -the payroll agency shared the actual pay rate which was sustainable ($2,300 a month, my bills are $1,800, $2,100 with your fee baked in. - I procrastinated this week because I didn't know how to read the bureaucratese on the assignment - I figured out how to read the bureaucratese and went back to K. saying, I think I've developed something genuinely useful as a reference material for new employees. I had to synthesize information from 100 pages of PowerPoints into a two page document which cleared up the anxiety I had about how to start -can't believe K. and other managers worked as Classroom Teachers because the way they scatter information has no coherence. I had to peruse numerous documents in the SharePoint "cloud" folders, take notes, and develop a master reference document before I could interpret how to develop questions based on the bureaucratese. -I was never the most organized classroom teacher but my students knew what was expected of them. I put dates on assignments that were linear and in a consecutive sequence of beginning of week, midweek, end of week. If students had a test, I made a review sheet that was a consolidated 2-7 pages. I would never expect even my Honors students to consult dozens of pages in order to study. -I told K. about the reference document I developed and she met me partway: she recognizes one aspect of the process could be better done, new employees could be more adequately trained on the acronyms we use. That's like 25% of the way to completion. I had to figure out that "Administration 2" means the second half of a course AKA Economics for 5th and 7th graders, and 11E just means 11th grade Economics. But instead of the standards being sorted by subject, they are sorted by grade. Since the standards start with 5 for anything 5th grade, 7 for anything 7th grade, 11 for anything 11th grade, it would be coherent to just combine the standards into one document and organize by subject. -Some companies are smart, caring people trapped inside of bad systems. Like classroom teachers. Pearson feels like a repeat of my last company in its poor design and incoherence but less abusive. H) Pearson assigned us 11 questions in a spreadsheet. I think fewer mistakes would be made if they paid a college student Education major $15 an hour to type up our assignments with the criteria they want for each question. Our time is worth $30-$100 an hour. We are subject matter experts. But comprehending the bureaucratese drains cognitive energy. -I had anxiety about getting all 11 questions produced then K. said, oh you only turn in one question for the first week. Something they never said on the Microsoft Teams meeting we had last Wednesday for onboarding. If I received a sheet with 11 questions in the cloud and my name on it that's what I'm going to think I need to accomplish. But K. put in another email, only submit one question for a week. Email should be subordinate to the cloud, the cloud should supersede email ex. The federal government supremacy clause: federal government has greater authority than state governments. -Spent an hour trying to save the questions I developed in Abbi, only for them not to process and upload. Abbi feels clunky with technical failures of the early internet

Remote, $2300 a month for not that many hours of work.

The widespread incoherence of Pearson is irritating me to a significant degree. -the hiring committee mentioned the wrong pay rate so I spent a month worrying about money -the payroll agency shared the actual pay rate which was sustainable ($2,300 a month, my bills are $1,800, $2,100 with your fee baked in. - I procrastinated this week because I didn't know how to read the bureaucratese on the assignment - I figured out how to read the bureaucratese and went back to K. saying, I think I've developed something genuinely useful as a reference material for new employees. I had to synthesize information from 100 pages of PowerPoints into a two page document which cleared up the anxiety I had about how to start -can't believe K. and other managers worked as Classroom Teachers because the way they scatter information has no coherence. I had to peruse numerous documents in the SharePoint "cloud" folders, take notes, and develop a master reference document before I could interpret how to develop questions based on the bureaucratese. -I was never the most organized classroom teacher but my students knew what was expected of them. I put dates on assignments that were linear and in a consecutive sequence of beginning of week, midweek, end of week. If students had a test, I made a review sheet that was a consolidated 2-7 pages. I would never expect even my Honors students to consult dozens of pages in order to study. -I told K. about the reference document I developed and she met me partway: she recognizes one aspect of the process could be better done, new employees could be more adequately trained on the acronyms we use. That's like 25% of the way to completion. I had to figure out that "Administration 2" means the second half of a course AKA Economics for 5th and 7th graders, and 11E just means 11th grade Economics. But instead of the standards being sorted by subject, they are sorted by grade. Since the standards start with 5 for anything 5th grade, 7 for anything 7th grade, 11 for anything 11th grade, it would be coherent to just combine the standards into one document and organize by subject. -Some companies are smart, caring people trapped inside of bad systems. Like classroom teachers. Pearson feels like a repeat of my last company in its poor design and incoherence but less abusive. H) Pearson assigned us 11 questions in a spreadsheet. I think fewer mistakes would be made if they paid a college student Education major $15 an hour to type up our assignments with the criteria they want for each question. Our time is worth $30-$100 an hour. We are subject matter experts. But comprehending the bureaucratese drains cognitive energy. -I had anxiety about getting all 11 questions produced then K. said, oh you only turn in one question for the first week. Something they never said on the Microsoft Teams meeting we had last Wednesday for onboarding. If I received a sheet with 11 questions in the cloud and my name on it that's what I'm going to think I need to accomplish. But K. put in another email, only submit one question for a week. Email should be subordinate to the cloud, the cloud should supersede email ex. The federal government supremacy clause: federal government has greater authority than state governments. -Spent an hour trying to save the questions I developed in Abbi, only for them not to process and upload. Abbi feels clunky with technical failures of the early internet

Exciting, progressive, mission driven place to work. Opportunities to contribute ideas and be part of an amazing culture. At every level people are approachable, open to new ideas, and genuinely kind, fostering great co-worker relationships and friendships.

Complex processes that sometimes lack clear guidelines or knowledgebases; decentralized/siloed teams, ever changing process and tech environment. Requires a self-motivated and persistent individual who seek out others for knowledge sharing if you are new to the company.

Simple interview Process. Great benefits

During the hiring process it was not explained that the department I was being hired in was department that was not only NOT ran by the actual pearson company but was also in the process of being sold.

Very kind, interesting, international, employee base. Lots of time off (vacation days, sick days, personal holidays, etc.). HR genuinely cares and will give you the best salary/benefits possible.

Old dinosaur company whose only solution to digging themself out of a ditch of irrelevance is restructuring every year. Company sales are down YoY and they are desperately fighting to do better. How does that look? Creating a ton of new initiatives for which they simply don’t have the manpower. You will be overworked, overwhelmed, and confused by the vague and constant demands of management. As far as growth in the org goes, it is a highly political system. Everyone has been at the company for 10+ years and is incredibly cliquey. You will only succeed if you work overtime and get everyone to love you.