One cog in the big machine - Anonymous employee Spansion Employee Review

2.0
15 Aug 2012
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Immediate middle managers are respectful to engineers. Work life balance is decent. Immediate team and coworkers feel like a close knit family. Pay is ok. Do a good enough job to be useful to your boss and they will keep you around and give you job security. Spansion is open to switching your role within the company if you are dissatisfied with the current one and want to try something different.

Cons

High level executives at vp level view engineers as expendable labor. They manage with negative feedback and like to instill fear among employees. The company culture is all about making aggressive deadlines set by upper management and causing engineers to sacrifice quality of their work. Each department is pit against each other with their own agendas/deadlines so there are inter-dept conflicts. Not much room to grow within a role. It has a big company feel where you will only be working on one portion of a project and feel like just a cog in the machine.

Explore other reviews about Spansion

5.0
29 Mar 2024
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

good location team was solid

Cons

none i can think of

3.0
15 Apr 2014
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Good place to work with lots of good people; laid back as most places in Austin are. Mature systems in a mature fab and everything is in full production mode. Lots of very intelligent, creative engineering talent here. Everybody there knows their job and do it exceptionally well. CEO did a remarkable job post bankruptcy especially keeping the company profitable.

Cons

Echo what somebody else said about little to no opportunities for growth in management specifically. Every upper level manager has been there for several years making it difficult for anybody to take those positions. Aging work force although not sure if that's a bad thing. Bonuses were an interesting exercise in futility. There didn't seem to be much visibility to what exactly needed to be done to get them. Forced distribution for employee ranking (quarterly and annually), while a common thing for most companies, didn't make much sense for a company that already had an extremely lean work force. They've gutted so many employees that most of the "low performers" were really average performers that just got screwed by the idea that a company has to have 10-15% of the employees be ranked into the lowest performance tier.

2
See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All