Pros
People here care about education and helping students. There is a lot of focus on if products meet the need and solve real problems. The quality of work is high - the curriculum and products have won multiple awards (Emmy’s, Codies, Serious Play, etc) - and people care about doing a good job. Teams are becoming more agile, with working product delivered every sprint. There’s freedom for teams to choose their process (no single StrongMind development Process). This can be good and bad - teams can do what works, but each team may be different. Teams can choose the right tool for the job and there are multiple stacks in use. Managers are available and make time for 1:1 conversations. They listen to employees and make improvements. Timelines for implementing the improvements can be a little overly optimistic, but the desire to improve seems is there. Work hours are good, with most teams working 45 or so hours per week. Good Internal community, with employee driven groups. For example, there’s a group that meets twice a week at lunch to play table top games, a bowling league starting in July, a daily meditation group. These groups were formed by employees and supported by the company. Full on-site Gym with showers and a locker room. PTO is average, but lots of paid holidays. 401K is a company contribution, not a match (so even if you don’t add, they do).
Cons
The company is finding itself, which leads to uncertainty. About 18 months ago new executives came in and started moving towards more of a product culture (that’s not the con). The changes have led to a tension between “old” and “new” way of operating. The old company was engineering focused and teams could do pretty much what they wanted. The development process was more waterfall - iterative cycles that added up to big deliveries with little given to customers along the way. Success was determined by how “busy” you were. The company is becoming more product focused and agile, with teams accountable for hitting objectives (but still having freedom to decide how they do things) and delivering every sprint. Success is now focused on results, not effort. We’re seeing some of that tension come to a head and people who were waiting to see if the changes stuck are now opting out (see some of the other reviews). This is exasperated by an approaching milestone to ramp up the LMS system (in pilot since April and ramping in July). There’s an increased urgency and stress level as that date approaches. I’ve seen teams being asked to work late a few times, but no mandated death marches. I believe people are waiting to see if the ramp is successful and using that to judge the newer leaders approach. There’s a lingering fear, based on past leadership being quick to fire. I haven’t seen this since I joined, but I’ve heard stories of people “disappearing” in the past. Everyone who’s been let go since I joined seemed justified. The company is 100% owned by a single founder and he’s still involved with the roadmap. He’s growing as a CEO, and teams have been allowed to focus on the new LMS, but there is still a tendency to direct the roadmap towards features not objectives. I’d expect a CEO to worry more about where the company is headed and less about the specific features in the product. The office setup is a little odd. The offices are on the second level and overlook the main floor. Most line and middle managers sit with teams, but executives sit above. Merit and comp changes have been average the past few years - not really good or bad, just average.
