Advanced Brain Monitoring Employee Reviews about "ceo"

Pros

The employees are great - very intelligent, cohesive teams - everyone gets along well. The projects they work on are interesting and the technology they develop is really cool.

Cons

Disjointed upper management - CEO and PresidentCEO and PresidentCEO and President don't seem to know how to run a company - they can't pick a direction to go in. President is a micro-manager with severe anger issues and is impossible to please finding fault in everything everyone does. He even blames staff for his bad decisions. CEO is nice, but allows his behavior to continue unchecked and oftentimes riles him up complaining about employees. Company also prides itself on paying below average wages.

Pros

I got to earn way more than my basic salary becuase of overtime work which was mandatory. We didn't have any other choice but to work longer hours.

Cons

This place was being run by a rude, micromanaging and mentally and emotionally unstable CEOs being run by a rude, micromanaging and mentally and emotionally unstable CEOs being run by a rude, micromanaging and mentally and emotionally unstable CEO who would get mad for small mistakes, would shout and nat at employees. Whenever the CEO was around, all of us were on the edge of our seats because we're not sure hot to move freely anymore.

Pros

Lots of different things to do and learn. But be cautioned you learn a way to do things that is unlikely to transfer unless you are on the research team (and maybe accounting?). Everything else is made up as they go and they do not follow any industry standards for anything. The engineering systems are very flawed.

Cons

Where to start? First, you should be aware that the entire research team, and even some of their replacements have left over the past 18 months. They were all honest about the leadership failures, tried to be constructive in helping right the ship, but were told 'if you don't like it, leave'...so they and some of the rest of us did. Second, at least 2 of these positive reviews were written by the marketing people, and they are dishonest- but they were having such problems recruiting, they added these to try to improve the image. The issues are myriad but here are a few: 1) the leadership is completely over-matched for the scale the company had grown to. The CEO had hired multiple Directors that had no idea what they were doing, and maybe 2 of them actually tried to learn and become competent. The other 2-3 just floated along- two engineering types simply did not work for years at a time, but they still got paid large salaries. They hired some other guy to write grants, and then when he failed at that they hired him FT anyway at a large salary? They all still work there last I heard. 2) While not dealing with high level salaried employees not completing anything on time, or at a quality that was not embarrassing, they will continually claim there is no money to pay people at mid to lower levels across teams, and if your manager does not fight tooth and nail, you won't get paid much- and I heard that the one manager that did fight for her team (the research group) left. So not sure anyone in management gives a crap about anyone or anything but themselves now. 3) The products could be awesome. But the CEO will not reign in the marketing group saying things like 'fMIR is not real science, like EEG', or selling 'metrics' that are fine for research tools, but are not solid enough to be profiting from- the workload algorithm was built on on a sample of 13 pp- even I know that is weak. But the CEO will melt down if you say it was only 13- she is convinced it is over 80...but read the paper- not just the abstract- it was 13. Meanwhile the technology and software apparently all worked at one point- but while I was there there, there were constant problems with gadget they used to synch things- to the point that the data files were corrupted beyond rescue in several cases (and when customers complained, the comments around the office were they were just nitpicky, and no one really used the technology that way...well except for those customers I guess?). The software for the EEG had also become a mess- they had an engineer trying to clean it up, but the lead software engineer denied anything was wrong, the marketing people again claimed no one cared, but some basic calculations were apparently corrupted- that did not seem ok to me) 4) my last straw was hearing that the CEO was now considered a liar by some pretty important people in the funding agencies- I did not want to end up stuck here or end up with a poor reputation by association, so I left...and apparently a lot of others left too.

Pros

Working at ABM provided me opportunity to gain skills in product development as well as neuroscience research. The CEO is an excellent leader who provides direction and welcomes input from employees at all levels. I was hired straight out of college as a Research Associate and was encouraged to take on responsibilities beyond the scope of my position that interested me both professionally and personally. The skills I developed working at ABM have directly contributed to my career progression.

Cons

ABM is a company with many interests and products, requiring it's employees to be able to manage diverse responsibilities simultaneously. Working for a small company requires you to take on large and small scale tasks.