employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

Security Benefit Group

Is this your company?

High school all over (the worst parts) - Associate Security Benefit Group Employee Review

2.0
Mar 7, 2024
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

-Potential for pay and benefits is strong. -Good place to get a few years experience. (Then move on)

Cons

-Favoritism at its worst; be prepared for “Mean Girls” work environment. -Mgmt is allowed to behave any way they want if they can lie their way around issues brought to senior leadership. -Mgmt is allowed to bully their staff into hitting deadlines that are set by people who don’t know the effort or details; then they are rewarded as if they did the work. -Employees are views as replaceable, which is why they now have multiple offices, to get around word of mouth in metros.

Explore other reviews about Security Benefit Group

5.0
Sep 13, 2025
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

SB was a great place to intern, offering the ability to gain real hands on experience. Everyone made sure to play a part in making my internship a success, and allowed me the opportunity to learn about other teams, business units, and communicate with top management.

Cons

No cons from me, my internship was a great experience with no shortcomings.

1.0
Jan 4, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

none. Kansas based interns preferred.

Cons

This is a small company with very limited processes and standards, and whatever standards exist are rarely followed. There is little to no proper documentation, no effective Scrum Master, no story-pointing, and no clear technical leadership hierarchy. If you come from a company with mature engineering practices, it can be very difficult to adapt and work here. A non-technical product manager largely drives decisions, while senior technical leadership is mostly uninvolved. Your experience heavily depends on the product leader you are assigned to—if that leadership is weak, it becomes extremely challenging to succeed. The HR function exists mostly in name only, and reporting concerns is unlikely to lead to meaningful action. While there are a few good managers, working with them is mostly a matter of luck rather than structure. Stories are assigned with minimal or no context, and there is no concept of backlog grooming or refinement. The architecture is outdated, the codebase is largely legacy, and documentation is almost nonexistent. Genuine technical input is rarely appreciated or acted upon. This environment may suit very junior employees or interns who are comfortable simply following instructions, but it can be frustrating for experienced professionals who value structure, collaboration, and modern engineering practices.

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All