employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

Branding Science

Is this your company?

Branding Science Reviews

3.5

54% would recommend to a friend

(27 total reviews)

49% positive business outlook

Branding Science has an employee rating of 3.5 out of 5 stars, based on 27 company reviews on Glassdoor which indicates that most employees have a good working experience there. The Branding Science employee rating is in line with the average (within 1 standard deviation) for employers within the Management and consulting industry (3.7 stars).

Reviews by job title

27 reviews
3.0
24 Nov 2022

Great team, questionable leadership

Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

I am very grateful for the opportunities I had at Branding Science, you are exposed to a lot of different projects and responsibilities so you learn a lot. The team (especially the junior staff members) are really fun and there's lots going on in terms of social events. Quick progression (in most cases). Mental health support is getting better.

Cons

Burnout is a real issue throughout the company. Inconsistent progression ladder, some people being kept behind due to office politics. Mandated 2 days in the office despite advertising flexible working, and very successful projects during lockdown when everyone worked from home. Whilst you have the opportunity to voice your opinions, that doesn't mean you're actually listened to, or that something will happen. CEO who lacks self-awareness, and lacks an ability to take accountability for mistakes. Poor retention of staff, particularly with people of colour. Poor treatment of people who decide to leave the company.

1.0
25 Mar 2023

Not for me

Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

* Team-oriented and collaborative US colleagues, and smart US leadership * An effective and friendly COO * Forward-thinking CFO * There used to be lots of talented and creative colleagues in the EU to learn from, a couple remain * Some interesting projects, although approaches and thinking not particularly differentiated from other similar agencies

Cons

* Massive instability made it hard to develop efficient ways of working. In the space of two years, approximately 20 people left the EU team (of less than 40 to begin with) * It felt like there was a significant knowledge and competency gap among EU senior leadership which made day to day work challenging, and had a lasting impact on my confidence and motivation. Specifically the following fundamental skills were missing, in my opinion: basic emotional intelligence, management, team building, and feedback skills, plus significant ignorance on DEI and mental health issues * DEI situation felt like it was stuck in the 80s. I was witness to, or on the receiving end of, numerous inappropriate comments. The resulting actions taken were limited, and in my opinion insufficient. I was told that the way the business responded was by the book (who wrote this book and whose interests they represent?) and that if I wanted to see a difference made I should be the one to do the work in educating people and making a plan for change; asking me to do work that others did not need to do in order to feel belonging. I believe that the ignorance among EU leadership and the lack of willingness to educate themselves created an environment where I did not have a right to the same sense of security as others without doing this extra work, and that I had to accept feeling diminished in the time it took to enact that cultural shift * I learned that it was not possible to trust the EU leadership. On multiple occasions EU leadership made negative comments about team members who were not present, and would say the opposite when 1:1 with that person, or in settings where that person was present. There were different things told, to different people, with other people’s points of view being incorrectly assumed or misrepresented * EU leadership seemed to lack the skill to see things from other points of view when it came to preferences in working styles (including reasons for wanting to return to office vs. staying remote) and training needs, and seemed entirely out of touch with the practical and financial realities experienced by graduates and junior team members * The training program was run by someone who did not understand the work and refused to learn, and responded defensively to feedback (despite being the person who trained others to give feedback). This training also used lazy and offensive country-based stereotypes as part of sales training (i.e. assuming that German clients would behave or respond in a certain way). It was one of the many ways in which the training felt dated and out of touch * The work and the offering to clients is not particularly differentiated, and there isn’t a clear brand identity, which makes it a difficult sell. There was potential but it was rarely realised * There did not seem to be a real career path forward for me

2.0
20 Oct 2022

one of the worst companies I’ve ever worked there

Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Nothing - there are no pros (dont bother working there) certain people are lovely - kept in contact with some

Cons

- manager was useless, was often rude and did not know to speak to people - had a blame culture within the company - certain employees did not know how to treat each other nice i.e. one colleague would complain to senior managers or CEO or managing director about a mistake that was made but would not speak to the person directly to resolve the issue. it was slightly embarrassing. - structure was shambles when i first started - did not see a future progression there - saw colleagues who worked there for a long period of time and did not progress

Viewing 1 - 3 of 27 Reviews

Glassdoor has 29 Branding Science reviews submitted anonymously by Branding Science employees. Read employee reviews and ratings on Glassdoor to decide if Branding Science is right for you.