KLA-Tencor – “Great Engineers, Low Morale, Low Compensation for Engineers. Unwilling to pay for the company's real driving engine.”

Pros

Highly competent peer engineers.

I've met several people who are extremely intelligent, and I learnt so much from them. KT has MANY Ph.D's, most of them aren't that intelligent or productive (degree doesn't change your intelligence, it gives you knowledge). Nonetheless, your chance of meeting outstanding ppl is good.

Cons

Morale, Compensation, Career advancement

Before I elaborate, I want to give a perspective. I have received the highest ranking (5 out of 5 levels) in the annual reviews most of my career at KT, and have several patents thru my work. I'm not saying negative things just bc i get bad reviews (i have never received bad review from my supervisors).

Morale isn't really something the company strives for. This is especially true with R. Wallace's management, as his focus is nothing but stock price. K. Schroeder had "great place to work" focus among several other focuses. "great place to work" was a complete failure (for the same reason that it just has never been KT's culture) but at least he tried. I've been at the company for several years, know a bunch of ppl, but i hardly meet anyone who would say that "KT is a great company to work for". I've heard something positive like that from ONLY highly paid exec's (GM and above) and new hires, new grads. You can easily find some patterns here. Another thing that i find consistent is that ppl who left the company tell me that they are "so much happier" and they didn't realize that "work (at KT) took so much out of me until now".

Compensation for engineers is below the standard. This is well known and i've been told that the issue was escalated to THE highest level more than once but each time, it was declined. It's true that if the stock goes up, that gives some cash to employees at any level, but engineers don't get that much stock benefit and it's not significant enough, anyways.

Putting all that together, i'd say that "at Engineers' level, the compensation is capped below the industry", while "at high level (above sr. director), it appears good".

Now, one thing i find inconsistent is that exec's and CEO say, year after year in the all hands meetings, that "talent is the true value of the company". However, the company is unwilling to pay for it. Some of my staff do outstanding work, yet GM denies raises to reasonable pay level because "the difference is too big". Well, the difference is indeed big because current compensation is too low....

I'd also add that Wallace did clean up, althought NOT completely, real bad politics/culture that infested in high level management before his time. Ones who adavanced their careers were the ones who belonged to "the boy's club" and who could "do the talk (BS)".

Naturally, I am planning to leave the company. I've been stuck at KT bc of my visa situation.

Advice to Senior Management

Just read other feedbacks on this website. You will find a pattern.

Since KT is terrible at integrating acquired companies, the internal talent factor is the real and only driving force/engine of the company. Yet, KT doesn't seem to support its real engine.