Stagnant Leadership, No Growth, and Zero Transparency
Pros
- The company campus is fantastic. - The salary structure ensures a good in-hand - A substantial PF deduction helps in building strong savings
Cons
- Leadership is dominated by long tenured employees, (~70 percent of the workforce), making it nearly impossible for new employees to bring fresh ideas. - New hires rarely last more than 3 years- They are either pushed out or struggle to sustain in a culture that favors old guards. - Instead of fixing core management issues, leadership constantly reshuffles employees while keeping themselves untouched - Major decisions , including layoffs, happen behind close doors with little to no communication. - The organization reacts to problems instead of planning ahead, leading to instability and constant restructuring. - Employees are left in the dark about long-term strategies, making career planning uncertain. - Performance evaluations are inconsistent and politically influenced , hard work often goes unnoticed unless you are part of leadership's inner circle. - Promotions are rare and not on merit, leading to stagnation and high attrition. - The company discourages innovation, despite having an "portal"- most suggestions gets ignored and later rebranded as leadership's own. - Despite claiming to encourage teamwork, department operates in silos, making cross-functional work frustrating - Internal knowledge-sharing initiatives lacks depth and practical value, existing mostly for optics. - HR protects leadership rather than advocating employees, making it difficult to raise concerns. - Exit interviews mere formality, with no real attempt to address systemic issues - Rigid work policies, employees are forced to commute multiple times a week on different leadership locations. - New employees planning to join Organization should be clear on this trap before making any decision
