employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

Amazon Web Services

Part of Amazon

Is this your company?

If you like professional burnout, become a TAM at AWS! - Technical Account Manager (TAM) Amazon Web Services Employee Review

2.0
28 Oct 2024
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

* Training - AWS prioritizes professional growth and has a matured onboarding program for TAMs. * Competitive salary. * Great benefits (401k match, Paid parental leave, military friendly) * Independence to adapt support plan to customer needs.

Cons

* Despite Amazon's LPs, Amazon has adopted a "Day 2" culture, making decisive action nearly impossible. Initiatives get lost in the bureaucratic process as much as any other large company (unfortunately). * Leadership churn and constant reorganization within the TAM org. I had 5 different managers in the span of 1 year, leading to awful team cohesion and coordination, along with presenting a revolving door of personnel to customers. * Too many goals/priorities for TAMs led to customer neglect and people adopting a "save yourself" mentality by pencil whipping metrics. * TAMs were required to push Amazon Q on customers to meet sales metrics, violating the integrity of the TAM as a customer advocate internal to AWS. This was highly tracked and pushed company wide. * Instead of leveraging existing global support teams for time-zone friendly support, I was asked (and expected) to hold calls in various time zones themselves, leading to 60-70 hour work weeks.

Explore other reviews about Amazon Web Services

5.0
5 Jun 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Good Compensation Chance to work on large scale projects

Cons

Promotions are slow Bar is not high across the company

4.0
12 May 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Operated in systems that had real scale, operational constraints, and production consequences.

Cons

Working at Amazon Web Services gave me strong exposure to distributed systems, operational ownership, and production-scale infrastructure, but there were definitely tradeoffs as well. One downside was that, like many large organizations, ownership could become fragmented. You often own a subsystem or workflow rather than an entire product end-to-end, which can limit exposure to broader architectural decision-making unless you deliberately seek it out. There was also significant process overhead. Design reviews, operational processes, dependency coordination, and organizational alignment were valuable for learning rigor, but they can slow iteration compared to smaller engineering teams. Another challenge is that large internal ecosystems can abstract away infrastructure complexity. AWS has extensive internal tooling, deployment systems, and operational platforms, which are powerful, but some of that experience does not transfer directly outside the company. I also found that operational work could dominate engineering time at points. Handling production issues, retries, integration failures, and on-call responsibilities teaches reliability engineering well, but it can reduce the amount of time spent on deeper technical exploration or greenfield development. Finally, there is the perception aspect. AWS is a strong name, but experienced interviewers know there is wide variance between teams and roles. The company name opens doors, but ultimately you still need to demonstrate technical depth, ownership, and strong engineering judgment independently of the brand.

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All