Meta FAQ

Pros

Work with some of the brightest and most motivated engineers you will ever meet. Great benefits, amazing perks, and a highly inclusive internal culture.

Cons

Can be difficult to "stand out" among so much talent.

Pros

Good benefits Nice office Very good work life balance Work is challenging but manageable Great people (those who were hired before the hiring wave)

Cons

Lack of diversity, a lot of politics Over hired in 2021-2022

Advice to Management

Have a higher standard for hiring

Pros

empathetic and supportive managers good employee benefits great transparency collaborative teams great diversity, equity and inclusion

Cons

The layoffs have been very unfortunate and stressful.

Pros

–Great compensation and benefits. –Great flexibility, with remote work for many roles.

Cons

Despite significant investment in diversity and inclusion programs (with thoughtful people doing meaningful work) and media hype, Meta's culture is fundamentally anti-Black. There's a high tolerance for poor treatment of Black employees. I've seen Black employees unfairly penalized in the performance review process, which is extremely political and usually based on likability. There's a gap between the diversity and inclusion hype, and the reality, for so many Black people. It's worse than I've see at any other company I've worked for or with. If you're Black, don't expect to stay at Meta for more than 2 years.

Pros

Great culture with lots of diversity

Cons

None that I can think of

Pros

The opportunity to work with some of the most greatest talented people IC career track provides growth opportunity without having to move to a managerial role Great remuneration, impactful work is recognised and rewarded

Cons

Lack of autonomy to change key HR/Recruiting Operations processes without engineering leadership approval even if process is inefficient and outdated Poor internal mobility career growth opportunities outside of tech. Transferable skills or experience are not given enough value. Roles are typically filled by someone who has done a like for like role somewhere else rather than growing employees internally or hiring someone for transferable diversity of thought/experience

Pros

gained really meaningful work experience

Cons

culture, lack of diversity and follow through if intention

Pros

Pay is outstanding Benefits are best I've ever seen Full of positive people who truly care about diversity and inclusion

Cons

Getting laid off isn't fun Job rows are narrowly defined, so doing the right thing is not encouraged

Pros

Company culture was genuinely positive. Everyone worked together for the most part, and found ways to connect with each other, even though we were all working remotely. Best work/life balance I've seen with any company. Company holidays, days off for holidays and active encouragement from management to prioritize your work/life balance. I was a contract employee, but always treated like a member of the team. I worked in different departments during my contract, and each department that I worked for always made me feel welcomed and supported. Both of my managers were great and always supported me when I needed them. The first company I've seen actively prioritize diversity and inclusivity in hiring.

Cons

Honestly can't think of any. I just wish there had been an opportunity for a longer contract or permanent position.

Pros

- None left: the company has completely changed over the past 4-5 years. I escaped after 6.5 years (Note: not laid off)

Cons

- Lack of leadership accountability & transparency: Between 2022-2023, the company has had 4 major rounds of layoffs, plunging revenues and profits, product misses and plummeting morale. During this time period, Mark gave nearly all of his direct reports glowing performance reviews - stating that they were either meeting or “exceeding” all of his expectations (this is a fact reported in the 10K company filing). When pressed about this by the employees during a Q&A, he attempted to defend his evaluation and claimed “leadership performance does not always need to match company performance.” This is the best way to sum up Mark and it trickles down from his reports to the rest of the company. The only people that get impacted by poor strategic decisions are middle mgmt and junior employees. Leadership is always exempt. — Lack of diversity in leadership: Mark continues to operate a fiefdom, where he has now surrounded himself by his old pals and "yes" men. There are only 2 "senior" women leaders left: CFO (recently promoted protege) and CHO. Both are sidelined and essentially talking pieces. Neither has taken any responsibility for the layoffs and simple mumble talking points during weekly Q&As. Neither is truly supported as a thought leader in the company. The rest of the leadership team are his cronies, who have been around for 15+ years. 5 top female product leaders and over 6 top female commercial leaders (VP & up) have exited in just the last 2 years. I left after 6.5 years and was 93% more tenured than the rest of the company. - “Move fast is OVER”: Entrenched and unwieldy admin/hierarchy required to ship product has escalated over the past 5 years and Meta has evolved to become a truly complex organisation that requires 15+ reviews of a product just to get it over the line. The Product Manager role has devolved to become a paper and review pusher, spending endless hours explaining products to program managers, lawyers and policy people who often don’t understand the fundamentals of technology, let alone customer needs. - Sexism rampant - especially during performance evaluations: I am a female product leader and when I took my legal parental leave (I am based in the UK and took the 1 year that is legally permitted to all UK citizens), my American manager told me “so you’re basically quitting.” Then when I returned, he demoted me and despite all my efforts to prove my performance at my previous level, refused to promote me, claiming he needed to see me performing at that level longer (mind you - my performance was so undoubtedly strong, that I received a “Greatly Exceeds All Expectations,” the 2nd highest at the company but still was not promoted). “Metamates” or Meta speaking heads will claim performance reviews are fair or rigorous but they certainly are not, and I have been impacted, and I have seen many others, especially minorities be impacted. Minorities are often asked to demonstrate strong performance for much longer periods of time (ex: 1-2 years) vs. white male peers who can often be promoted in 3-6mos for “business needs.” - Constant reorgs: Sure, fast growing companies should have reorgs more frequently, and I have worked in start-ups and several faster big tech rivals and accept reorgs as a norm. However - reorgs at Meta have a life of their own - they are a technique to move around management, create a constant environment of chaos and stress to induce people to leave or force burnout. One partner team I worked with reorged 4 times in one year. None of them even knew what their team was called or did anymore, and we all referred to their old team name anyway.

Advice to Management

"Advice for management" is pretty pointless - Mark runs his own fiefdom and doesn't need to account to anyone/anything.