I have decided to share a work experience that profoundly affected me, in the hope that it may help others make informed decisions. This is not an act of vengeance, but rather a description, a personal and sincere opinion of what I experienced in a company that, although it promises much, delivers very little in terms of respect for people.
1. CEO / Leadership
The general attitude toward employees is purely functional: you are useful as long as you work hard and stay silent. The idea of going the “extra mile” is normalized to the point of absurdity, not as a sign of engagement, but as a basic obligation. Appreciation? Only if you consider it synonymous with “I didn’t complain, so it’s fine.”
Top-down communication is rarely cordial. Greetings are optional; thanks are nonexistent. Meanwhile, there is discourse about “cultural awareness,” but only downward, never reciprocated. Leadership is not built by example but by pressure and control—control that sometimes seems more like operational obsession than managerial care.
Micromanagement is elevated to an art form: everything must be verified, reconfirmed, monitored. Decisions are fragmented, frequently changed, and space for professional autonomy is almost nonexistent. You begin to wonder if you are an employee or just an “autopilot” within a structure of excessive control.
2. The Board
The management structure seems beholden to a system of personal loyalties. Promises evaporate in the absence of external pressure, and salary increases appear more like hard negotiations than recognition of merit. The boardroom atmosphere resembles a fan club more than a leadership council.
3. Pseudo-Organizational Culture
Honestly, this is one of the most toxic environments I have worked in. Many team leaders are perceived by employees as “instruments” of management, engaging in opaque practices and making decisions behind the teams’ backs. They actively pressure employees to accept tasks outside their job descriptions under the guise of “engagement.”
The chances of having a team leader who exerts more pressure than support are high. When confronted about such behavior, the standard reaction is a shrug and a “I can’t do more.” Yet curiously, “I can’t do more” when it comes to supporting the team, but they can display exceptional zeal in front of management.
Soft skills training is continuously imposed, often repetitive and without practical value. Refusing participation immediately labels you as “not committed.” While some projects run on legacy technologies, the company obsessively insists on “personal development,” often in illogical ways.
Example: being required to read a personal development book and film yourself presenting it. This exercise feels more like a test of submission than a genuine act of learning .I would rather stare at a blank wall for hours than read something so trivial and mediocre again.
4. Interaction with Leadership
Collaborating directly with the company leader makes things considerably more difficult. The tone is frequently condescending, and respect for employees’ time is almost nonexistent. They habitually contact you, by phone or message, five minutes before the end of the workday to initiate conversations or calls that can extend an hour beyond contractual hours. Discussions are often redundant, unstructured, and of little immediate relevance. There are no signs of gratitude or apologies for this behavior. From my experience, this is not an exception but a normalized and repeated practice within the company.
Furthermore, the top leader is omnipresent, from daily meetings to internal processes to onboarding details. The level of oversight resembles a Big Brother culture. It is almost unbelievable how one person can be so present in so many operational aspects while preaching “professionalism” and “ownership.”
5. Dynamics Among Colleagues
The culture of suspicion is strong. Some colleagues feel compelled to pass along “observations,” either out of zeal or a desire for validation. This creates an environment of distrust, where you never know if a simple opinion expressed over coffee will reach “higher up.”
Additionally, there is constant pressure to give internal presentations, whether you want to or not. Refusal or hesitation is viewed with suspicion, and participation quickly becomes a disguised obligation. What is even harder to accept is the atmosphere during these presentations: in some cases, the same colleagues use the context to assert themselves, asking leading questions or making remarks that undermine rather than support.
The environment becomes one in which you are tested, judged, and sometimes subtly humiliated. If it does not happen during the presentation, it occurs afterward, through comments or jokes in the office among those considered “engaged” or “aligned,” who seem more focused on validating their own status than supporting colleagues. The atmosphere turns into passive-aggressive competition, where what matters is not what you present but how you are perceived by the “good” group. The irony is that you are told it is in your best interest to present, that everyone is there to help you grow, and that all feedback is positive, but this is a joke.
6. Performance Evaluation
Actual work is secondary to “engagement,” meaning participation in training, internal activities, and ticking attendance boxes. Evaluations are influenced more by internal visibility than deliverables.
7. Contracts and Pressure
Contractors may face restrictive clauses that limit professional freedom, presented as protective measures but functioning more as instruments of control.
8. Manipulative Practices
Some team leaders hint informally that “there will be no raises” to generate a general sense of resignation. Meanwhile, they receive benefits but create the impression that no one else does.
The constant message is that you must “bring value,” meaning participation in all sorts of internal activities, training, presentations, and soft initiatives to qualify for benefits, team-building, or even raises. This completely ignores the fact that the actual work performed daily for the client already constitutes clear value. In practice, what matters least is what you actually contribute to the projects you are paid for.
9. Feedback
No feedback from employees is taken into account. Everything dictated from above is imposed regardless of anyone’s will. Employee satisfaction surveys are a joke: only the positive aspects matter; negative aspects are ignored. They are merely a marketing tool used to simulate professionalism. Real changes do not occur; usually, only superficial rebranding is done, leaving the underlying issues unchanged. Feedback reaching team leads or exit interviews is lost along the way.
10. Final Considerations
Some individuals are omnipresent and hyperactive in all internal initiatives, but it is difficult to determine whether this is genuine passion or strategic opportunism. Many colleagues perceive them as actors in a poorly staged play. Unfortunately, those who notice this often lack the energy to comment.
Beyond all this, the general feeling is that you exist in a cheap theater of absurdity, where rules are fluid and the scenery constantly changes to give the impression of progress and reform. In reality, the game remains the same: one of control, constant pressure, and enforced conformity. There is much playing, but nothing is truly won.
A pseudo-company that, instead of developing people, seems more concerned with control, image, and conformity. It functions more like an extended family business than a mature organization. That is all, and nothing more.
P.S. Many positive reviews should be approached with significant skepticism and critical thinking. The company is aware of its reputation and attempts, in various ways, to engage in damage control.
