employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

RAPT Therapeutics

Is this your company?

RAPT Therapeutics Reviews

4.0

66% would recommend to a friend

(35 total reviews)

Brian Wong

86% approve of CEO

57% positive business outlook

RAPT Therapeutics has an employee rating of 4.0 out of 5 stars, based on 35 company reviews on Glassdoor which indicates that most employees have a good working experience there. The RAPT Therapeutics employee rating is in line with the average (within 1 standard deviation) for employers within the Pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry (3.5 stars).

Reviews by job title

35 reviews
2.0
27 Dec 2020

Science good, people unhappy

Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Most people are collaborative and promote feeling of teamwork COVID-19 communication is better now than it was in early summer.

Cons

Workload gets very heavy for some, while others barely do lab work yet get equal credit as the people who are working a lot. Career growth not equal...some seem to grow fast while others can’t see future. Work culture got sour because problematic people are praised and protected. Management doesn’t take issues between employees seriously and company should revisit harassment training more frequently. Work-from-home policy got confusing...seems to change.

4.0
25 June 2018
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

- There are some great scientists who are highly motivated, intelligent, collaborative, and hard working at FLX Bio. The culture is very welcoming and team oriented, which is shown by the rapid progress in all the projects. - Most of management does a good job leading the company but sometimes seem disconnected from the scientists performing the work. They are fairly transparent about the state of the company at regular all staff meetings. - Salaries are on par with other Bay Area biotechs.

Cons

- Management made a few bad hiring decisions but they seem to mostly be swept out the door. On the topic of hiring, a small company like FLX Bio struggles to compete with Big Pharma in attracting quality candidates. - Work-life balance is modest but at a small company be prepared to work a lot. - Long term stability of the company is unclear (being a small start-up and all) - HR does not have the trust of the rank and file due to several hiring blunders, shifting of blame, and treatment of past & present employees.

2.0
12 Apr 2021
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

* Great people for the most part - friendly folks * People are passionate about the science * Good projects working on interesting targets * Free lunch twice a week * Pretty good productivity and results despite small team * While funding weighs heavily on everybody given nature of small company and biotech industry, has never directly impacted ability to conduct research

Cons

* Politics come into play with promotions * Promotions are slow across the board for the most part, unless management really likes you or is scared of losing you * Pay raises are pathetic - essentially pegged to inflation * Generally speaking, across the board, everyone is about one level too low relative to their job responsibilities and demands in reality: either being asked to work beyond their capacity or underpromoted/compensated - some are arguably two levels below! * Management happy to increase your responsibilities immensely while not promoting or compensating accordingly * Management has blinders on and is only focused on the science - not noticing time bomb ticking with unhappy scientists and increasingly toxic culture * Management sets absurd goals and timelines and expects team to actually meet them * Middle management mostly poor: while their scientific caliber is appropriate, most are focused only on the success of the project and care little for their reports. They are very willing to burn through all goodwill and respect to move projects forward. * Research Associates (Ph.D. or non-Ph.D.) not treated well. While their feedback is readily welcomed, it is never heeded, which is perhaps worse than not having feedback solicited. * Key players neither treated appropriately nor compensated accordingly. Even across departments, most can tell who are key drivers, regardless of title. Job titles come into play more than they should. * Related to previous point, key drivers do not receive appropriate public acknowledgement. Inconsistent standards in acknowledging people's efforts. Middle and upper management happy to acknowledge everything to team to the rest of company when key individuals drove the majority of work. * COVID response was disorganized and outright pathetic. No support for vaccines. Went into SIP with county and region, then promptly returned to work in person within a month once it was clear projects would stall out. Despite enacting (poor) precautions for COVID limiting lab time, productivity was still expected to be comparable to pre-COVID, despite management's insistence otherwise. Colors were shown clearly then. * Massive attrition problem largely related to the aforementioned points; have hemorrhaged over 15 people per year past two years * Hiring problems leading to vastly understaffed and overworked teams, particularly in certain departments * Hiring pipeline is questionable: some good hires, a few home runs, and some extremely questionable ones; little middle ground * Pipeline is narrow and has currently only hit on CCR4

Viewing 1 - 3 of 35 Reviews

Glassdoor has 35 RAPT Therapeutics reviews submitted anonymously by RAPT Therapeutics employees. Read employee reviews and ratings on Glassdoor to decide if RAPT Therapeutics is right for you.