Never join this sweat shop with horrible values - Senior Consultant Zenoti Employee Review

I recently wrapped up my time at Zenoti, and overall it was a really positive experience. The team is full of smart, supportive people who genuinely care about the work they do. I always felt like my contributions mattered, and I had the chance to learn a lot and collaborate with colleagues who were generous with their time and knowledge. The product itself is strong and constantly evolving, which keeps the work interesting. There’s a good balance between structure and flexibility, and I appreciated the trust and autonomy I was given in my role. Like any fast‑moving company, there were busy periods and shifting priorities, but nothing outside what you’d expect in a growing tech environment. The positives definitely outweighed the challenges.

None that I can think of.

Strong product with real market potential in a growing industry. Smart, talented colleagues - particularly at the individual contributor level. Decent compensation depending on level/location

Leadership terminations in the US are frequent, abrupt, and follow no discernible performance process. In roughly 18 months, the following roles were eliminated — most with no warning, no performance improvement plan, and no transition period: CFO (~1 year) Chief Customer Success (~8 months) CRO (~7 months) SVP Marketing (~1 year 7 months — role hired and fired more than once) VP Growth Marketing (~1 year) VP Demand Gen (~3 months) VP GTM Operations & Enablement (~3 months) Senior Manager, Integrated Campaigns (~8 months) Senior Events Manager (~10 months — role hired and fired more than once) Content Marketing Specialist (~8 months) Social Media Manager (~4 months — role hired and fired more than once) These are not people who left. They were let go — abruptly, and without process. This level of sudden termination makes sustained strategy nearly impossible and results in repeated resets for teams trying to execute long-term plans. Decision-making is highly centralized with the CEO. Pushback or alternative viewpoints are not welcomed, despite what is communicated publicly. The expectation is execution only — not strategic contribution. Psychological safety in meetings is an ongoing issue that HR acknowledges but is unwilling to address at the leadership level. It's also important to understand the operational structure. While the company is often positioned as US-based, nearly 80% of the company is located in India. This shapes decision-making, collaboration expectations, and working dynamics in ways that aren't always transparent during the hiring process. US employees may find the day-to-day reality different from what was described. Marketing specifically is difficult for experienced operators. Strategic ownership is limited, modern marketing disciplines are underfunded and misunderstood, and attribution models are a mess — which minimizes marketing's measured contribution and creates ongoing tension between teams. There is a pattern of forced exits and abrupt terminations, with most tenures lasting under a year - especially across the marketing organization for US-based employees. This is not coincidental. It is the predictable result of an environment where strategic contribution is not tolerated and pushback is not an option. Strategy, time, and people are consistently undervalued. Teams routinely invest months in planning and execution — only to have it dismissed, ridiculed, or scrapped entirely. A recent example that illustrates the broader pattern: 200+ non-India employees across sales, marketing, and customer success were flown to India to align on 2026 GTM strategy — a significant investment during a period of tight budget management. Executives stood on stage presenting company strategy, were called and let go on the spot approx. 3 weeks post event. The result was a rapid reset, leaving employees feeling that substantial time, budget, and personal sacrifice (7+ days away from family and some travel costs) had been invested in work that was immediately discarded. This is not an isolated incident - it's a continuous pattern of abuse, negligence, and narcissism at the highest levels of the company. Leadership communication is also a serious concern. The CEO and co-founder both regularly conduct calls where their cameras are off while employees' cameras are expected to be on, often with multiple people present across the organization. What occurs on these calls is not constructive criticism — it is public ridicule, raised voices, and demeaning language directed at employees (of all levels, not limited to leaders but anyone). When concerns about this mistreatment are raised directly — including explicit requests to not be spoken to that way — employees are told this is simply how leadership communicates and to accept it. HR is aware but it still remains unaddressed. Ask any US-based employees and they will have a story of witnessing verbal torture or enduring it themselves. The impact ripples through the organization. Because this behavior comes from the top and goes unchecked, managers below are left with two choices: mirror it or stay silent to protect themselves. The result is a culture where teams work in silos, leaders are afraid to advocate for their people, and genuine psychological safety does not exist.