Cons
The company appears to be in decline with few new projects, and when projects do arrive, leadership tends to prioritize acquiring more resources or additional client contracts over meeting existing client requirements — often at the expense of quality.
A notable example: during a major project that was otherwise going well, leadership imposed extremely tight deadlines that required employees to work weekends, with no compensatory offs provided.
The policies have also gotten progressively worse. Time tracking was recently introduced, and the leave and WFH policy is highly restrictive — same-day WFH is not permitted even for illness, and WFH requests must be submitted a day in advance. Leave entitlements are significantly below industry standard, even compared to mid-sized companies.
Career growth is not merit-based. Advancement largely depends on personal proximity to the owners, which in practice means voluntarily taking on responsibilities beyond your role and putting in overtime. There is no structured reward or recognition program — outcomes are entirely at the discretion of ownership. Appraisal cycles are changed without notice; for instance, just before the October cycle, employees were informed without prior warning that the cycle was being merged into April, effectively delaying increments by six months for those due in October.
If your salary crosses a certain threshold, expect vague justifications during appraisals — such as being told that AI handles your work now, or that you are lacking in areas that were never previously flagged.
Overall, favouritism is rampant and the environment gradually erodes both confidence and professional growth.