Hyland Reviews

- Compensation is below market rate for quality engineers. - Time with the company is weighted far more than performance. - Codebase is low quality, you will spend more time navigating enormous amounts of technical debt than you will writing code, which will hurt your ability to learn solid engineering principles. - Outdated tech stack - none of the three major front-end frameworks are used, nor is the most popular VCS. This will affect your ability to market yourself in the industry. - Zero emphasis on CI/CD, you will do code deployments manually, a tedious and error prone process which takes time away from writing (and learning how to write) higher quality code. - Unit tests are so tightly coupled to implementation that they are not useful. - You will not be rewarded for taking initiative to refactor or improve the stack. The emphasis is on implementing only the absolute minimum needed for enhancements. In summary, the technical environment here is brittle and promotes development patterns that are not industry standard. You can learn more, use better tech, and get paid more elsewhere.

- Low pay compared to other places - Loyalty over skill: you are rewarded for staying with the company over your merits - Big divide over who is manager and who is not and how individuals are treated because of it (makes it difficult to interact with managers and can cause resentment) - Blame culture: if you find a fix, you are told to blame it and have the person who broke it fix it, it really does not cultivate teamwork and fosters an environment of let's get code that doesn't break the branch over quality code - Churning out code over resolving technical debt: many parts of the codebase is archaic and never touched again due to no client need, new code is usually "bandaged" over it - Does not pay for travel: if you worked 8 hours and took 3 hours to commute to a client, you are not paid for the 3 hours.