TribalScale Reviews

The CEO is a bully with outrage issues, and the people he surrounds himself with are just as narcissistic as he is. Leadership over the years has transitioned from being somewhat functional, to consisting of blind followers of the CEO. This was done by firing any who disagreed with him, only to fill their places with a nepotistic hiring policy. Until several months ago, there was only person who would stand up to the CEO--the COO. For reasons above my pay grade, the COO was fired. Any changes that seem positive on the surface always have ulterior motives. For example, TribalScale takes great pride in their gender policies--equality in gender, feminism. Yet, there is gender pay inequality in TribalScale. If the company really cared about equality and feminism, how could there be gender pay inequality in TribalScale? Overall, changes that look good on the surface are important to TribalScale because it increases their valuation as a company. They only care enough to give outsiders a good impression to look like a more desirable acquisition. $$$ For a short while, there were anonymous question submissions for our "monthly" town halls (monthly in quotations because they would often be delayed or cancelled). One anonymous question submitted was by a female employee raising that she had been sexually harassed by a member of leadership. Some HR speak was made in response, but nothing seemed to have been done. However, for the next town hall, someone submitted a question about peanut butter, to which the CEO spent all of 5 minutes verbally berating the person for asking such a stupid question. After that, anonymous questions were removed. It's apparently more important to be able to fire people who ask stupid questions than give people an avenue to express their real concerns. The CEO is a salesman first and foremost, which has a huge impact on company culture. One of which affected me greatly was the lack of acknowledgment of engineers as individuals worthy of growth and investment, but instead as resources to be allocated. They were extremely intolerant of less experienced engineers who need time to ramp up, yet were also unwilling to address "senior" devs who were being paid a lot but added no value and hindered projects. I have suspicions that the low quality hires was a result of pressure on recruiting to hit quarterly targets. Many of the great devs that I worked with who were hired within the first two years of TribalScale's inception were being paid poorly, while the more recent low-quality "senior" devs were making potentially twice as much while being dead weight--refusing to work on features because they felt it was hard or didn't understand what to do, poor communication with the team, not knowing how to use basic tools like git and unwilling or unable to learn. TribalScale was not paying all of their developers equally, and they knew it. There was an attempt by some engineers to pressure leadership into publishing salary ranges, but for months this was not done because they did not want to admit their pay inequality.