Colleagues are great, but management lacks transparency - Anonymous employee Aeven Employee Review

Supportive and collaborative teammates who are generally easy to work with and willing to help. Positive working relationship with direct management, with managers who are approachable and supportive at the team level. Workload can be manageable during certain periods, allowing for good work-life balance when project demands are lower. Strong team culture within individual departments, fostering a productive and enjoyable working environment.

Cross-functional collaboration can be challenging due to a culture of pushback between teams, which can slow down decision-making and execution. Leadership at higher levels is sometimes perceived as lacking urgency in modernizing processes and adopting newer technologies, often favoring a "if it works, don't change it" approach. Limited investment in process improvement and technology modernization may impact competitiveness and contribute to client attrition in favor of vendors with more current capabilities. Return-to-office policies have created frustration among employees, with many viewing the rationale around collaboration as unconvincing or disconnected from day-to-day realities. Communication from senior management lacks transparency regarding company performance, organizational changes, and workforce reductions. Management quality appears inconsistent across teams, with some employees reporting insufficient support from their managers, particularly when navigating organizational decisions. Benefits have become less competitive over time, including reductions in areas such as leave encashment and healthcare coverage. Workload can fluctuate significantly, leading to periods of high pressure and unpredictability.

Work - Life Harmony. Great benefits - Free parking, Medical Reimbursement, Clothing Allowance, Rice subsidy, Performance bonus and Annual Salary increase. Flexible work arrangement = 1x a week RTO.

Global management presence is not strongly felt at the operational level, leading to a disconnect between strategic direction and day-to-day execution. Local (PH) management tends to implement decisions primarily based on ELT direction, with limited consideration of the impact on employees and operational realities. The “People First” principle is not consistently reflected in actions and decision-making, resulting in a gap between stated values and employee experience. It just became a loosely used tagline. While processes are widely communicated as “ITIL-aligned,” actual execution appears fragmented, with teams operating in silos rather than following integrated service management practices. Performance management lacks consistency and fairness. High-performing and dependable employees often carry a disproportionate workload, While employees with frequent escalations are reassigned to less demanding accounts without undergoing formal performance improvement processes (PIP). These challenges contribute to reduced morale, perceived inequity, and inefficiencies in service delivery. Addressing these gaps would significantly improve both employee engagement and operational effectiveness.