Literal Humans Reviews

-Managing Director, Paul Perry, has little expertise or experience in the services he sells - a lot of smoke and mirrors. - Management is very unethical: Willing to gaslight, lie to, and manipulate employees when it benefits profit. Some situations with employees even have questionable legality. Laughably, the company's values are all about "being human" - Managing Director displays the Dunning–Kruger effect: the cognitive bias in which people with limited competence in a particular domain overestimate their abilities, and do not possess the capability to understand their errors. In short, not knowledgeable enough to realize their own incompetence. - 4 women were fired or quit on bad terms in the span of one week. - Almost all employees have left on bad terms. - All partners/shareholders in the business have left after experiencing the chaotic, poorly-run business. -Employee turnover extremely high - Management willing to lie to clients or under-deliver low quality work to gain higher profit margin. - Managing Director severely lacks leadership skills. - Internal processes and projects: extremely messy. Very revealing of unprofessionalism, and poorly run organization. - As an employee, I would be very cautious of wasting my time and energy with this organization. As a client, I would be scared to trust this agency to handle my projects.

The CEO lacks the leadership and technical skills required to effectively run an organization. His approach relies heavily on surrounding himself with talented individuals, delegating the bulk of the work to them, and reaping the rewards of their efforts. This has led to a culture of burnout and high turnover, as employees find themselves overworked and undervalued. These are usually women, people of color, people with physical/mental health issues, and other vulnerable groups. Meanwhile, the CEO compensates himself significantly more than the rest of the team despite contributing a fraction of the effort. The CEO consistently takes credit for successes but avoids accountability when issues arise. His "hire and fire" management style creates an atmosphere of instability, with employees feeling their positions are insecure once they fall out of favour. Despite appointing himself “head of sales," the CEO demonstrates a lack of understanding of both the industry and the operational work his team delivers. Unsurprisingly, he makes very few sales. His lack of expertise results in poorly scoped projects, overpromised deliverables, and an overstretched team, ultimately leading to substandard outcomes and client dissatisfaction. When clients churn, it exacerbates an already challenging work environment. The response to employee burnout is dismissive, with the CEO placing responsibility solely on team members to manage their workloads and mental health. This lack of support fosters a toxic workplace culture. Additionally, derogatory language is commonly used to describe both current and former employees, as well as clients. Remote team members who expressed concerns about inclusion during a return-to-office policy rollout were dismissed as “needy.” During my time with the company, the CEO’s erratic and unpredictable behavior, compounded by noticeable substance abuse issues, created a tense and uncomfortable work environment. He often attended meetings under the influence, which further undermined team morale and professionalism. Employee benefits were frequently reduced or eliminated without warning, including cuts to leave allowances, mental health support services, and remote work, with an aggressive RTO policy for London-based employees. These decisions starkly contrasted with the company's stated mission of supporting employee well-being and financial stability. Cost-cutting measures appeared to target the wrong areas. For example, the company spent excessively on vanity projects such as a podcast, B-Corp certification (achieved by outsourcing the work to a virtual assistant), and a costly East London office space that the company could not afford. In contrast, critical investments in team welfare, fair compensation (including overdue raises), and even the tools needed to carry out work were neglected. In 2024, the CEO decided to terminate all employee contracts, moving staff to freelance arrangements—despite clear legal and ethical concerns. This action contradicted his public commitments to providing financial stability and job security. The employee turnover rate reflects the unhealthy work culture. Over the course of just over a year, more than 100% of the team left, with 13 employees departing during this time. In summary, while the team comprises talented individuals, the poor leadership and toxic workplace culture created by the CEO severely hinder the organization’s ability to succeed.