UserTesting reviews

3.6

64% would recommend to a friend

(355 total reviews)
avatar

Eric Johnson

70% approve of CEO

72% positive business outlook

UserTesting has an employee rating of 3.6 out of 5 stars, based on 355 company reviews on Glassdoor which indicates that most employees have a good working experience there. The UserTesting employee rating is in line with the average (within 1 standard deviation) for employers within the Tecnologías de la información industry (3.9 stars).

Reviews by job title

355 reviews
1.0
Feb 13, 2016
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

A lot of us have become good friends, which is one of two reasons I haven't quit yet. In fact, it's one of the biggest reasons most of us are still here. Those who suffer together... The other reason I haven't quit yet is because there's some flexibility (depending on your direct manager) with working from home - which is always a savior on the sanity front. Dog friendly!

Cons

CSMs get judged on a LOT of metrics, and are constantly hounded when one of them drops. It's unreasonable to be expected to respond to e-mails within 2 hours AND reach out to all customers at least once every two week with proactive & strategic material AND take care of all project management AND attend all the internal meetings AND conduct quarterly business reviews with all your customers - who by the way, don't actually want to do because they're also busy - AND everything else. There's only so many things you can work on if you want to keep your sanity and not work 15-hour days. Too many internal meetings. Granted, not all of them are explicitly mandatory, but management notices when you don't attend and you get verbally berated anyway. CSMs are the *only* people in the company who get "rated" by at least 5 different other teams in the company, and by customers as well. It's a lot of pressure to keep all of those ratings up. Ever since they created the Customer Operations Manager role to manage the CSMs, there's been a *lot* of micromanaging. When things go wrong, upper management demands to know what *YOU* did wrong. Yes, sometimes, it's our fault. But sometimes, failure is inevitable and instead of being asked why we failed and how we should handle it in the future, it would be much better for morale to show empathy, put them in our shoes and see how difficult it is. Speaking of which, a lot of customers are *not* suitable for our platform and services, but they get sold - and often times oversold - anyway, and then CSMs have to deal with them for a whole year. You basically get set up for failure. When researchers mess up on a study (or multiple studies) it's also your responsibility, even though it's not your job to do research, because your supposed to know everything - and I mean EVERYTHING - about the customer, so nothing should have gone wrong. Internal tools are a pain to use and when we make product requests, it's hard to get them pushed through. Big changes happen often and without your input. They recently hired an exec who has caused a lot of friction/drama with people, turned the Customer Success team into sales - essentially, and just gives off a really inauthentic aura that makes most of us uncomfortable. He comes from a very corporate background, which stuck to him, and doesn't mesh with our company culture. And while he claims that he knows how miserable we are (which everyone seems to have noticed, and obviously not a good sign), nothing he's done so far as shown us that he actually cares. In fact, he doesn't take feedback well at all - after starting at UT, he created an account manager role called Customer Growth Executives, which the majority (if not all) of CSMs (and even CGEs) did not feel comfortable with, because it gave the impression that they were there to increase the dollar amount of contracts - which is true, but he meant for it mean that CGEs were there to support the customer and grow their business. After almost all the CSMs and CGEs said they felt like it meant increasing the dollar amount of the contract and were therefore using the title of "Account Manager' instead, he ignored us all and "decided" that it was going to be CGE. Pay is not up to par with the industry standard. When some of us raised this concern, upper management told us that when Client Success Coordinators became CSMs, it was due to an internal reorg and not an actual promotion - which is true, *however* that internal reorg also gave us at least twice the amount of work, so the slight increase in our salary was not justifiable and STILL below industry standard. These are just *some* of the things that are driving CSMs crazy - and away from the company itself.

2.0
Apr 16, 2015

Awesome coworkers; inexcusably bad management practices.

Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

The lower-level employees are great people. I made good friends here. It's a way to get your foot into the tech industry.

Cons

The company suffers from serious issues: nepotism, favoritism, and sexism. Forcefully oppressive cultures exist in many departments. Sexual harassment is prominent in the SF office - my personal experience with this is one of the reasons I left the company. Employees are overworked, yet underpaid and undervalued, especially on the Research Team, which provides the core service for the company. Compensation is off by tens of thousands of dollars for many roles. Most people in upper management were brought in for their resumes or through nepotism, not for their skills or abilities. Managers at this level tend to be hypocritical and unaccountable. They have no respect for an employee's time, regularly canceling one-on-ones and check-ins without notice. The founders are nice, but seem to be largely unaware of the mistreatment of lower level employees. Initiative is not rewarded; it is more likely to be punished. Never do anything on "good faith" for this company, you will regret it. The most unfortunate thing about the whole situation at UserTesting is that there is NO trustworthy HR presence, so there is really no reason for managers to conduct themselves properly.

1.0
Jan 7, 2021
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Hot Market, decent product, great engineers

Cons

Management is all related and totally and they will fire you if you do not agree with them or if you question their process. All sales, pro services sucks now as does their panel. 4 testers take 95% of their tests according to Usertesting engineers. Great upward movement if you are related to management.

avatar
UserTesting Response
5y
Sounds like you must have had some struggles here and I'm sorry about that. While our management team, and especially the c-suite, get along and enjoy working together, we have few relatives on our leadership team. Maybe it just seems like we are closer in relations than we are. We do heavily encourage employee referrals (27% of all hires last year and we paid $120k in referral bonuses), most of these hires were outside the management team. In that group are many friends and family -- and we love that since these relationships make UT a better place to work. Last year and the year before, we promoted or gave new positions to over 30% of the employees that started the year with us -- something we are really proud of. I think you are off base with your thoughts on our panel. Given the volume of tests performed to get to $100M+ in ARR, those 4 people would be working 100s of hours a day to get 'em done. :) While we don't really disclose the size of our panel, we do know that our tests are filled rapidly and performed quickly. I think you might be off in your estimation by a huge magnitude.
Viewing 28 - 30 of 355 Reviews

Glassdoor has 806 UserTesting reviews submitted anonymously by UserTesting employees. Read employee reviews and ratings on Glassdoor to decide if UserTesting is right for you.