Xendit Reviews

3.6

66% would recommend to a friend

(376 total reviews)

Moses Lo

76% approve of CEO

53% positive business outlook

Xendit has an employee rating of 3.6 out of 5 stars, based on 376 company reviews on Glassdoor which indicates that most employees have a good working experience there. The Xendit employee rating is in line with the average (within 1 standard deviation) for employers within the Information Technology industry (3.9 stars).

Reviews by job title

376 reviews
2.0
19 Dec 2023

Culture is slowly dead

Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

1. The compensation and salary are good 2. Unlimited leave (though at the current company situation, it doesn't have much appeal anymore) 3. Used to be WFH, but slowly going into hybrid 4. Some of the people are great

Cons

Xendit used to be a company I am so proud to brag. The culture, the people, the C-levels, the very competitive salary and benefit; but starting for early 2023 (or perhaps, late 2022, after the first layoff) everything started to degrade. The managers and above people started to hide things (especially related to layoffs). They did a lot of restructuring in a very short period of time (the latest one was within weeks). And with the restructuring, they started to let go many people SILENTLY. Instead of doing it mass, like in 2022, they picked 2-3 people per division per week so it won't get noticed. In the recent method, they put people into the Growth Plan (equivalent to Performance Improvement Plan - PIP) with absurd targets. Most of the reasoning were that these people have to catch up with their current level expectation. Refusing it lead to termination (rather, forced resignation in most cases). Doing it also will not guarantee you a safe position. Halfway into the GP, you could also find yourself terminated without proper reasons. Eventually, they did a mass restructuring shortly after previous restructuring. What changed in the latest one: 1. Managers are advised to focus on profit and loss, and abandoning values. They were told that their job is not to friends the engineers. Part of their Loss defining, is perhaps, identifying who to kick out. 2. Managers are no longer responsible for their team's work. Other (deemed) seniors or architects are replacing the managers to assign works to the rest of the engineers (in fact, there are only 3 people in total) 3. Xendit's values are dead, if it's not already clear enough in the first point. One of the 3 seniors/architects responsible for the other engineers openly mocked other engineers, spreading toxicity everywhere, and ironically had the gall to speak about team work and no blaming culture (and he was always the first person to finger point when issues happened). And no one can do anything about it. You report him, you'll be the next person to exit the company. 4. Managers are literally useless at this point. They have to listen to the new big bosses. 5. The absurd Growth Plan. It's the new weapon they've devised to kick people out. 6. Moral is low and people are demotivated. They work everyday, fearing when it'll be their turn to be kicked out. 7. No more work-life balance. Up until a year ago, it was something encouraged. Nowadays, the bosses blatantly said that overtime (even including weekends) are mandatory. You have to record your achievements/contribution every 2 weeks. Because that will be your performance review baseline. 8. People are kicked out. Yet they do a mass gathering every month and fly people from all over the countries into one place. Why don't you just fly the key persons to certain countries instead of having mass flying to one country every month if money is your issue? 9. Career opportunity is gone. There will be a 12 pages long list that I can write about what changed. But Xendit is no longer the great Xendit many of us used to love. It's now no different than other companies trying to make money by squeezing their employees dry. When other company say something about family, I cringed. Not when Xendit said it, because that's how good it was. Now, though, they're literally licking their own spit.

1.0
27 Sept 2022
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

- Fully remote work - Historically well funded - Takes risks: each co-founder has their own personal team to fulfill their agendas which are largely focused on experimentation with the exception of the COO team, whose job is to make the COO seem engaged)

Cons

- Lack of strategy: no vision or guidance provided on where the company is headed and how to get there, specifically how all the different businesses fit together, and to mitigate regulatory and compliance risks - Lack of accountability or ownership: it seems like nobody wants to make decisions because they don't want to be responsible if something goes wrong, which creates excessive swirl across critical initiatives - Ineffective management: leadership seems more focused on maintaining their scope and influence in the organization than trying to effectively scale and manage the business (e.g., Product, Operations), numerous occasions of leaders "dropping bombs" into projects or organizations that are well intentioned but negatively impact the initiative due to their lack of engagement and understanding, no emphasis on talent development, and leaders are overly sensitive to feedback (e.g., Product, Tech) - Toxic culture: the company has become divided into 2 different groups, one group has been there since early stage and now feel entitled to their roles focused on maintaining scope without doing what's required to drive the business forward, the other group are relatively newer joiners who are eager to take the business to the next level but constantly blocked by the first group and leadership not enabling them with the autonomy to operate effectively - Not employee friendly: need to provision own laptop for work, expensive health care programs, required business travel not well accommodated

3.0
22 Nov 2023
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

1. The people. For a company based in Indonesia, this was the best pool of people I've encountered. Compared to other Indonesian companies: - Diverse and international pool of people - Almost no politics among peers - People are time-efficient and smart - People are not nosy about your personal life - People lead interesting lives outside of work. Some of these colleagues become good friends outside of work. 2. Both a pro and a con: you are expected to wear many hats no matter your role. The C-levels hate clear delineation of roles & responsibilities (I've asked a C-level in a 1:1 regarding roles among the C-levels. That C-level told me that the C-levels just take whichever project they like/have capacity on. The CEO doesn't like roles). The pro is: you get to learn a lot of things. 3. You get ESOP. Quite rare for a Southeast Asian company. But with their recent austere efficiency measures, I’m not sure if ESOP is part of any packages anymore.

Cons

1. The cofounders want everything done at once: at any given time there are like 20+ projects running at the same time, and they want all of them run at maximum efficiency, highest quality, lowest cost, and lowest time -- which they don't realize are sometimes unattainable. They seem to believe in the credos of Silicon Valley tech/VC circles about exponential growth, 10x, limitless growth, etc. But never on real physical constraints or real human psychological constraints. 2. Very fast working environment that is difficult to stay afloat in: this is the fastest environment I've been in my life. Even more difficult to stay afloat on compared to attending a US engineering school. If you can't move fast and repeatedly hit the ground running, you'll get exhausted/burnt-out quickly. The learning curve always goes up, but not in a good way anymore. You really don't have a chance to stay afloat. Whenever you are afloat, more tasks/expectations will be ballasted your way. 3. Breaking changes too many times: C-levels don't shy away from introducing breaking changes (whether it be process, operating principles, compensations, etc.). e.g. The management announced a major planning paradigm change within 17 days of each other (from bottom up, to more top-down list of company priorities), expecting reprioritization ON THE NEXT DAY. Creating decision paralysis and task paralysis for many teams. 4. Management processes scale up but not balanced by expectations on output: we take more chunk of our time than before to write peer reviews, create plans, get graphs and deepdive the numbers for monthly reporting, but C-levels always expect a day-1-startup's level of output. 5. Permeating hack-it-til-you-make-it culture instilled by the cofounders: as the systems grow complex, many mid to low level workers realize the need for more careful planning to ensure the robustness of our systems. But CEO/CTO/COO often jumps down to certain teams with quick and major projects, expecting solutions to be shipped within days to a maximum of 2-weeks, often encouraging us to do the hacky solution to deliver the expected result. Thus cancelling the people's effort to create a robust system. 6. Shared resource to a fault: the ratio of QA:Eng or Data:All or Design:PM is quite unhealthy (data is worst, like 3-4 analysts vs the whole company) and the upper management turns a blind eye to the real struggles people face due to these "centralized" resources on the ground. They persuade us to think of the difficulties as upskilling opportunities, while practically those difficulties have already been eating at overall efficiency. 7. Example of getting to wear too many hats; boundless expectations for PMs. We are expected to do literally everything (customer interviews, scrum, UX design, data analysis/scripting, managing partner comms, manual testing, solutioning, product marketing, etc.) like a Silicon Valley-calibre PM no matter our level of experience, but with Southeast Asian pay. It got to a point where everyday you simply have more things to do than the capacity of work that you can humanly possess. Task paralysis and prioritization (re: ignoring lower priority items for long periods of time) become daily life. 8. C-levels don't acknowledge speed-accuracy tradeoff. A CPO officer said "it is not the right mindset to have" that quality and speed can't go hand in hand. Yes they can, but the C-levels are blind to the position on which they are currently standing on, Is it a position where quality and speed can be achieved simultaneously or there is still a long walk to get to a point where quality and speed can be achieved simultaneously? 9. Too action-biased: there is a serious lack of protection for sitdown/thinking/maker time and all the attention/opportunity/encouragement for action -- no matter whether the action is right for the long run or mindless. 10. Not valuing its people anymore: Xendit used to be a “family of honeybadgers” but now the cofounders are “honeybadgering” their own people (multiple stages of conspicuous and silent layoffs, rumors of forced resignations). The cofounders seem to be ruthless businesspeople only loyal to their investors.

Viewing 1 - 3 of 376 Reviews

Glassdoor has 410 Xendit reviews submitted anonymously by Xendit employees. Read employee reviews and ratings on Glassdoor to decide if Xendit is right for you.