Pros
Compensation and benefits were highly competitive, and the projects were generally engaging. The CEO was a developer for many years and he's obviously very knowledgeable. While there were occasional frustrations, the team was collaborative, and I enjoyed much of my time there, despite a noticeable decline toward the end.
Cons
The company started out as a fairly positive workplace, but significant changes over time affected morale and productivity. A major round of layoffs impacted teams across the US, Europe, and India, which led to a noticeable decline in morale. Soon after, leadership shifted focus dramatically, embracing vague AI trends while de-prioritizing technical expertise. This shift coincided with a hiring freeze in the US and Europe, followed by aggressive hiring in the Philippines—suggesting a long-term move away from Western teams. Process-wise, the Innovation team became bogged down in excessive bureaucracy toward the end of my tenure. Even minor tasks required heavy refinement and approval cycles, severely limiting output. Attempts to take initiative were blocked by rigid adherence to "the process," while contradictory expectations for "off-the-books innovation work" led to nowhere. Ironically, I was told in the end that I wasn’t productive enough—despite the system actively preventing real productivity. It was at this point that I realized I was working in a toxic environment.