Pros
I worked alongside some genuinely talented, resilient, and supportive people. The positive aspects of my experience came from those individuals rather than the organisation itself. I also formed lasting friendships with colleagues who supported one another through what was, in my experience, the worst toxic workplace I have ever experienced.
Cons
This was the worst career decision I have ever made.
For anyone reading the existing reviews and wondering whether they can really be as bad as they appear, my experience suggests they should not be dismissed lightly.
The company publicly promotes values centred on empowerment, inclusivity, wellbeing, and respect. My experience of the internal culture did not reflect those values. Employees were frequently referred to collectively as "the staff", reinforcing a clear divide between leadership and the wider workforce. Whether intentional or not, the impression was that some individuals were valued more highly than others.
The culture at senior leadership level felt political, cliquey, and driven by personal loyalties rather than merit. Influence appeared to depend on remaining in favour with the right people. Individuals could move quickly from being praised to being blamed, often with little consistency. The result was a culture of uncertainty, self-preservation, and constant pressure.
The compensation package may appear attractive initially, but it comes at a cost. Long working hours, constant availability, early-morning calls, late-evening contact, and expectations beyond contractual responsibilities were normalised. Going above and beyond was treated as a baseline expectation rather than something worthy of recognition.
Anyone who places significant value on their mental health, personal boundaries, family life, or overall wellbeing should consider these realities carefully. This was not a demanding but rewarding environment. It was an exhausting and ultimately unsustainable one.
The recruitment process can be highly persuasive. Looking back, it often felt geared towards overcoming concerns candidates may already have heard about the business. The compensation package becomes easier to understand when considered alongside ongoing retention challenges. Multiple teams have experienced repeated turnover, and the organisation's reputation within the industry appears to have developed for a reason.
Recognition was limited. Accountability was inconsistent. Mistakes attracted attention far more readily than achievements, and blame was often more visible than support.
The single most significant issue is senior leadership. In my opinion, many of the challenges within the business can be traced back to decisions, behaviours, and standards set at the highest levels of leadership. Culture follows leadership, and the culture here reflects that reality.
Basic standards of professionalism were frequently lacking. Meetings were cancelled at short notice, senior leaders regularly failed to attend meetings they had arranged, and urgent requests could arise with very little warning. Employees were expected to absorb these disruptions while their own time, workloads, and commitments appeared to receive limited consideration.
From my perspective, HR support and employee safeguards appeared absent or ineffective for a significant proportion of my time there. In an organisation experiencing this level of turnover and employee dissatisfaction, that represents a serious operational and cultural concern.
The experience affected my confidence in founder-led businesses for some time after leaving. Rebuilding that confidence has took longer than expected.
It is often said that "if you can survive there, you can survive anywhere." That is not a compliment. It is one of the clearest warning signs a company can have.