Disclaimer: This review reflects the company’s current state based on my experience. Things may improve in the future if leadership becomes more structured and self-aware, but as of now this is honestly one of the most operationally confused companies I have seen.
Oh boy, where do I even begin?
This company operates like a textbook semi-lala setup where almost everything is driven by impulse, panic, and ad hoc decision-making rather than actual strategy. Leadership seems obsessed with cutting costs while simultaneously expecting an understaffed and burnt-out workforce to execute ten different priorities at once. Most employees look either exhausted, mentally checked out, preparing to resign, or simply waiting to be fired.
There are virtually no systems in place, and the funniest part is that if you actually try to build one, you get punished for it. My team once spent significant effort building a dashboard, only for someone from the founder’s office to suddenly shut it down in the name of “cost cutting.” Anyone with even basic operational understanding would know how painful and resource-draining dashboard migrations are. But logic rarely seems to matter here. Even worse, once rebuilding efforts started, data team resources were cut as well. The company creates its own operational chaos and then acts surprised when things become inefficient.
Within roughly a year, the company lost the Product Head, Finance Head, Tech Head, and Marketing Head. At some point, this stops being “bad luck” and starts looking like a leadership problem. If senior leadership across multiple functions keeps leaving, it usually means the people at the top are either impossible to work with or incapable of building a stable organisation.
This is also one of the few companies where role allocation feels completely detached from actual expertise. Someone working in QA engineering can suddenly end up managing Product simply because someone from the Product team left. Instead of hiring experienced replacements or building specialised teams, leadership reshuffles whoever is available into completely unrelated functions. It creates confusion, weak ownership, and eventually mediocrity across departments.
Upper management has a serious micromanagement problem. Leadership wants complete control over everything while simultaneously lacking the competence, structure, or clarity required to run things efficiently. Employees are not trusted to do their jobs, but leadership also fails to provide consistent direction. It creates the worst possible combination: high control with low organisational maturity.
Another frustrating aspect is the presence of spineless middle managers whose entire contribution seems to revolve around creating endless spreadsheets, trackers, approval layers, and review loops that add little actual value. Instead of enabling execution, they stall work just to appear “process driven” in front of leadership. The culture sometimes feels less like a fast-moving startup and more like a government bureaucracy where paperwork becomes more important than outcomes.
The hypocrisy around employee wellness is honestly astonishing. Externally, the company loves talking about employee health, wellness, and culture. Internally, employees are treated like endlessly replaceable resources whose only purpose is to hit aggressive growth numbers before burning out. The gap between branding and reality is so large that it almost feels satirical.
The management structure is another disaster. Strong managers who push back, advocate for teams, or ask uncomfortable questions do not last long. Instead, the organisation rewards weak managers and politically convenient employees whose primary skill is agreeing with leadership. Office politics often matter more than competence, and that culture slowly poisons the entire company.
One of the biggest issues is the complete absence of strategic focus. One day the founder wants to build one thing, the next day the co-founder suddenly wants something else, and then priorities shift again a week later. The company feels less like a serious organisation and more like a group of adults randomly chasing whatever new revenue fantasy excites them that week. Internally, employees are constantly left wondering whether leadership actually has a long-term vision or is simply improvising in real time.
Financially, the company is not even struggling compared to many startups in the same space. In fact, it is doing better than several competitors. Which makes the paranoia-driven cost cutting even more bizarre. Like many startups today, leadership also seems dangerously overconfident about AI. In the name of “AI productivity,” people are being fired to automate functions that absolutely require human judgment, creativity, and relationship management. Instead of using AI intelligently, it often feels like leadership is using it as a trendy excuse to reduce headcount and please investors.
At this point, if cost cutting is truly the ultimate objective, maybe leadership should consider replacing themselves with AI as well. That would probably save the company a significant amount of money too. Founders could simply sit at home and watch AI attempt to handle strategy, hiring, culture, and operations, since apparently every other role in the organisation is now considered replaceable in the name of efficiency.
To be fair, there is one genuine upside to the chaos. Because the company culture and structure are so loose, people who are curious and willing to take initiative get extreme flexibility to learn new skills outside their domain. You can end up handling responsibilities far beyond your role simply because nobody else is available to do them. While this is obviously not sustainable organisationally, it can genuinely accelerate learning for employees who want broad startup exposure. Personally, I learned a lot because of this environment, even if most of that learning came from surviving dysfunction rather than good leadership.
Finally, here’s the truth bomb: if you are excellent at sales, you will probably do very well here because this is fundamentally a sales-driven organisation. Sales is the only department that currently seems protected from the constant chaos, cuts, and instability. Everyone else is basically fighting for survival while leadership keeps reshuffling priorities every quarter. That alone should tell prospective employees everything they need to know about the company’s actual priorities.
Right now, the organisation feels reactive, chaotic, politically driven, and structurally fragile. The scary part is that most of these problems are entirely self-inflicted.