I've learned a lot and grown a lot here, but have also a lot about best practices gone wrong as well - Senior Software Engineer LinkedIn Employee Review

3.0
24 Apr 2012
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

1. Engineers are pretty good 2. People care about the site and what they are working on 3. Performance is (usually) rewarded 4. You have a huge impact on the world 5. The day-to-day environment is pretty nice 6. There are interesting problems to solve in architecture, scalability, etc.

Cons

1. The architecture of the site is in shambles. Over 300 distinct services on the site. Not a single person could draw even a quarter of the current architecture. 2. The code base is in shambles. There are no comments or documentation in any of the code base. The wiki may be years out of date 3. Within the last year, culture here has gotten extremely political. I'm afraid to do a great job and discuss what I'm working on because it may cause a turf war. 4. Speaking of culture, LinkedIn's is a "culture of fear." We are over post-mortemed. People have responded by going through ridiculous lengths to CYA 5. Middle management is highly variable in quality. Middle managers are promoted by how well they manage upwards, not how well their teams are doing. I've seen people promoted that I frankly felt should have been shown the door based on their lack of professionalism and performance. 6. Engineering is stuck in a vice grip from product 7. When a team is mandated to build a piece of infrastructure, it takes forever and usually comes out as an over-engineered mess that's less capable than the open source alternative they spurned to write it in the first place.

Explore other reviews about LinkedIn

5.0
25 May 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Love it, high paced environment

Cons

no cons! love the people and culture

3.0
21 Feb 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

-Control your schedule -Office environment is great -Teammates are nice and helpful

Cons

-Customer Success metrics lack clear ownership and actionable levers. Many CSMs do not have direct control over the outcomes they are measured against, and success narratives are often based on isolated or non-replicable examples rather than scalable processes. -Microsoft’s increased influence over LinkedIn has led to tighter promotion structures and more limited compensation growth pathways. -Product value within the LTS portfolio is inconsistent. LinkedIn Learning struggles with perceived differentiation and impact, while Recruiter’s market position relies heavily on legacy dominance rather than clear ongoing innovation or customer value expansion. -Metric design and performance management frameworks were created without a strong operational understanding of the CSM role, resulting in accountability for outcomes that CSMs cannot directly influence. -While many CSMs share these concerns, there is limited upward feedback or structured challenge to leadership regarding metric design and role effectiveness, which limits opportunities for meaningful reform. They prefer to lick the boots of senior leaders rather than tell AV and his team how they actually feel and see progress to better, more impactful metrics. For individuals who are comfortable with high call volumes (10+ customer interactions per week) and performance metrics that are influenced significantly by external factors rather than direct role ownership, LinkedIn LTS Customer Success can be a suitable environment.

3
See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All